The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutpitkin.boa.94.05V J~ -.~_.y . .- ..- ~ . S' I .av ..:a .. .. ~. vn .,-.: ... ~ it PITRIN COUNTY ~B/OARD OF ADJUSTMENT /~ G~ DATE ~~~/,/~"~ CASE # "l ~a v REPRESENTATIVE /r0i~~ -~ ~JOr° /(~zL ZCtF- PHONE ~"Z~"~/~'d~ ~N~ MAILING ADDRESS G23 .(,! ~2~ uZ,C~ ~~ eS~oZeJ/??ct-SS ~ ~~/Sc~ OWNER JOB C-~- ~~ PHONE ~°Z ~. ~ D~ ..: MAILING ADDRESS D-Zy~y ~`-/~~~ ~t ~r T7~L ~//7dW/~'~/~-SS (~J ~~~'~~ /~ ~~ LOCATION OF PROPERTY ~'~/' ~t~Jlz~ ~Ti S~~ l.~l~?Q SS ,~(~s~ ~-Ei~ Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be p may return this application if made art of this Case. The Board ..w it does not contain all the facts in question. Owner's Signature (TO be completed by the Zoning Department) Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the Zoning Official to forward this.. application to fhe Board. of Adjustment, and reasons for not granting a building permit.: '' ~S-3O Zone District.. Requesting: >~ISFs~Lot Size ~' Front Yard Setback Variance, where IGiC)' is required. Rear Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required. ' Side Yard Setback Variance, where ' 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 : ~ t~2 . (~,1~ _ &'+~1,1'S~.. ,/~9 C~ ~~~ i~A. ~ P~ /1 "a ~ i ~QR.1~ 0 Zoning/~ Officials---)~ x ~r1~.._Q~._ Application filed D "0 Parcel~/iD No. Z~~O~ -X7,3-~'~-~J~ Date of Meetinq Notices Mailed Z ~ ~ Secretary a4~-G~h~`-E-~y~~~ Refer Resolution to $uildng Department ;~ ; Yes ; _ ; No BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD; OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE ,REQUESTED ZONING OR USE VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Ptkin County Resolution of Sune 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in City Council Chambers, City Hall, First Floor, Aspen, Colorz~do (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 Zoziing Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protssts 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 affec ed in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance, THE PARTICULARS OF THE HEARING AND OF THE REQUESTED dARIANCE ARE AS FOLLOWS: Date and time of meeting: Owner: Owner's Addr~ssc Property Location or Description: April 5, 1994 at 5:15 p.m. Sheriff's Conference Room Pitkin County Courthouse Joe & Janet Raczak 0234 Light Hill Road Snowmass, CO 81654 0234 Light Hill Road Lot 1, Block 4, Filing 3 Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Req~Yesting approval for a 93' front yard setback variance, where 100' is required in the RS-30 zone district, for construction of an addition 'to a single family residence. Approval of this variance request would allow the proposed residence to be located 7' from the front property line. VARIANCES GREAR'ER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD'BE GRANTED. Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT `Suzanne L. ff, Secretary s,, r Y ` .. ~ .. JOSEPH & JANET ~ACZAK. 0234 Light Hill Road Snowmass, Coloradm 81654 (303) 92?-4800 (Home and FAX) (303) 925-4869 (Janet Work) (303) 925-?820 (Joseph Work) March 9, 1994 Joanna Schaffner Aspen/Pitkin Zoning Office Members of the Board. of Adjustment 130 $. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Joanna and Members of the Board., of Adjustment, Please accept this letter in application for a request for a variance from the front yard setback for the purpose of constructing an addition to our residence located at 0234 _Light Hill Road, in Gateway to Snowmass Mesa, Snowmass, Colorado. Due the downzoning of the Gateway subdivision, we are unable to meet the 100 foot setback requirements in adding to our present structure, which is already within, the setback. We placed the addition. on the north side of our home to accommodate the addition of a garage at the bottom of the driveway, attached to the present structure. Had we placed the addition on the south side of the structure, all of the views from the main portion of the home would be obstructed. Additionally, we would have to accomplish a great deal of cutting and filling in order to place the structure on the. south side as the slope is steeper, and drops down. and overshadows Light' Hill'Road. We would appreciate approval of our plans as submitted. Regards, Jo Rac, zak~ ~~~~.~ anet Raczak ." ~.. .4,,... , ~ ,.. LI51' OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OW1~c:1tS RACZAK AbDTTION BOARD OF ADNSTMINT Robin & Peter Van Domelen P.O. Box 1302 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Frances N. Chaves 285 Light Hill Road Snowmass, CO 81654 Paula Barclay 229 Light Hill Road Snowmass, CO 81654 Jay & Susan Hammond 0266 Light Hill Road Snowmass, CO 81654 George & Karen Draper 161 Light Hill Road Snowmass, CO 81654 John Young & Linda Vieira 0095 Light Hill Road Snowmass, CO 81654 Francis & Betsy Krizmanich 0079 Light Hill Road Snowmass, CO 81654 Francis Chairamonte S. Maryland Hospital 7503 Surratts Clinton, MD 20735 ~. ~2~~tct~,~-r' ~L 3~(~/ i > n r DAVIS HORN INC. PROPERTY LOCATED AT: 0234 light Hill Road Old Snowmass. CO. 81654 ~~~~ ~'f~ ~ ~~~ g' > `"' `= ;~~~ ~.~ ,.:..u.. }- P''s ~ y~ ~' J ~ W ~ ~ n` 1 "';tip., ~. ~ :, ~iCK /~Q ~:Agrv ~ L ,~~, w , . / y{n R~'.j~ L - ~ y>ywy V~14i~}5~1y`g Y Mvl rr wA. -Y4b5/~n~ 1Yd .. ~"i{.A ly W 1... <~~~ Yr k:' Po - - ' ~' a ~ ' +w,ar ~~ k astir- +~~! ~' a K In '{ ~s {{,{,{~~~~.. ra x t zl'' i ~'rhX'{~y~ ~W a''7a~~•/~ K' ~~ is ~'~ ~ a*~F w ;.'y. X5x"VY n - Sk\ S ~/~ - '~' e ra ~ r sy*tw. ~ ~ Ai ~. s+sx"'~ wtq ~~ }, "a/q^'", a ~i"~4kfms ,- a la yry~~ y` 1 , ~' s ro li~~r ~rgt +' ~ ~~t~ /' n- ~~ ~' ry~1v ~~ryra ~ ~ a~ YY ,+~~~, ~.y ^*~."l ~be Y~5' y'~4'~4< ~~~`4Yy wSdM1Y ~K ~ 1 ,v.'av i. ,~c:: ~.~-~:.«~k~~ea ~.~'~w>w~ •,;..~sn< '^IFaa..4~.:... . ...< - ., , x. 'Y' uluwfi.. 7 .~ut '°' ~ M'3.r1 - ' ~ ~ i ~ ~• F`~:5, '*Y ~I,u~µu,. w,.y,. XI }. ,+ Q a(~~ ! ~, y.Xi Ib'4.. ' .. 4. r - ' . ,., ~ L GA~ \ ^a' .,~ .,':~ S~ -'~°~3#° F. n q" 'w~ r 'c ur''"t, '-, C~ , V t ' i t ~ d$«4~''~<.wti~yv - ~'~' tsr ~~ ~ ' ..n ah%"` .~ &~~v1.ry~$``aa,,~~((~~ .. ..~'t°.h5d! ~N a5 ~ u'~~ y ~ ntp ' '~7':~4 .[ <t .+`erv ~~,,,, ~' ;;k- ... r€ MN n Yw~ ~_ ` y'°fS a+'°"a~ x .? ,~ ti•'~adA~`~~~ .C^"' . n ~ .« t x- .. ~ >n k;a~'~ `„l ~ ~ ~~ ~~g,r'~'~ ' a %- w °L5 yy vas "P~'.*C ~. .•OGG Y ~ *.~WRt 3'M3`~~a'~v/ H i'y„',q, t p -'~~{AA~ l7 ~~~ . , /~, - . ,. .,~.~ ? ,^ i~ .1i Kai"~Y~ Y4 x tip V' a,ZyJ k "{/" Nw~VN _ _ .~ s~ /,y .:., ~ ~P 3a ..,.., nEtrR ~~... "' _~ .-,~ ", ,. ..... \ ~ ,, ... ~ p n, k ~~ I l 1 n, ~~ _ - - _ ~ Ii r - /YC ssa~ '~s~v 1 i, ~ ~ %,£Z ~ `.i ~ ~. J~ t:S ~- ~" ."-' ~: „~ ~ .. ^ ,. au w; _ „~-+, a - mss.. .~ ~,. ~ . -,. . a 4 , ^ ~. n ~- .. .. ::m i ~.. •. ~. .:. . , .. _ f E- • ~ .... ~ k. ,: , ~ ':. • .. -:. 1"30 South.Gelena StreeC ~ .> .. ~ ;;, ,; ~ ~'- ' Aspen, Cokuado 81611 ~ . - (303) 920-5091) i.. LAND USE APPLICATION FEES '' CITY: -63250-134 GMP/Conceptual -63270-136 GMP/Final -63280-137 SUB/Conceptua( -63300-139 SUB/Fnal -63310-140 All-2 Step Applications -63320-141 AII1"Ste lioations P APP -63330-150 Staff Approval -63432-157 Zoning Plan Check -63432-157 Sgn Permd -MRO11 Use Tax for Sign Permits HISTORIC PRESERVATION: -63335-151 Exemption -63336-152 Minor -63337-153 Major Devel. -63338-754 Sgnfl. Devel. -63339-155 Demolition COUNTY: -63160-126 GMP/General -63170-127 GMP/Detailed -63180-128 GMP/Final ' -63190-129 8U6/General -63200-130 SUB/Detailed -63210-131 SUB/Final -63220-132 All 2 Step Applications -63230-133 All 1 Step Applications -63240-149 Staff Approval -''13450-146 Board of Adjustment ~--~ 5 %~ -63235-148 Zoning Plan Check REFERRAL FEES: -63360-143 Engineering -County 00115 -63340-163 Engineering -City ° - 00123 -63340-190 Housing 00125 -63340-205 Environmental Heakh ` • PLANNING OFFICE SALES: -63080-122 County Code - -69000-145. Other (Copy Fees) TOTAL // ~qC Z4 ~OC) ~ ~~ ~ h 7 Name: 1 Phone: n~( ~ Address: o~ 3~ (i A~-I h ~ ~ ~ 1~ ... project: ~~.. - ~~ S`mo~ss ~i ~-05 :; Cheek #: ~ ~ S 0 Date: ~~~~ ~ ~ , No of Copes: / b ,. ~1 County of Pitkin State of Colorado The undersigned, follows: I, 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 the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the ,~ day of Iw~t~'~- 19 9 Y to the day of _ ~i~1~~ 19 ~~ (Must be posted for Before the hearing date). App 'cant's Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this ~_ day of _ , 19 by t,~~~.,% ~ ~ ~~ r~:F~ WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. My Commission expires : ~~~ ~~ ~~~ Z~u ~"~z.<.. ~ Notary lies Signature Address "'"' ~( ~t } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY } gs• POSTING OF A VARIANCE HEARING } BEFORE T8E PITRIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT being first duly sworn, deposes and says as R 1{41 ~~~ .~~~ ~ ~,~~ ~.1~~ .. t ' W i 1,~ yx~~; ~~ j ';! i ~. i.~ I Ali ~';~ j ~ I i~ ~I i; ~i ,i I I'I ~ ~, ~ \ ~i ~, I ~ ~ ~; i '' i i ' I ~. 1 ~, ~ ~i) i Il " '~ ii I i ~ I i ~ ~ I (i i ~ I ~ i I ( ~ i ~ ' ~ ~I ~ ``~ pia il'i~~ 1 I I ~~ i ~~ ~ ~+ ~ ~ ~ (,,I~.~i11„Il i I,II~I ~~i II ,i ~ ' I' I j I ` , f I '~ , !j' ~, ~ , ~ --, V0 ~~i4 ~ S r-9- ----- - ~ :6 I I I ~ ~ -_ I ~ ., __. ~~ ~ --- ~. _ ._ _ I \ / I - ._ ___ _ \ ~ I I Z ~ O I ~ I _ _._ _ ~ !! I ~ I .. _ .._ : ... _ _. _ o ;. ~ ., Ili' ~~ ,,I ~~~ I~ .~. ~ i -- ~I ~ ii'.. ~ , ,, ~~ _ ~; ~ , ,, ~ ~ L' I I I1 f I ±{ III ~ i t + f i I +I j ~I!I I r I ! I I ~ ' ! I i l i ' ~~ ~ ' ~ I ~ i ` I ~ ' I ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~. ~ ~' t I ~ I I ~ i I ~ ` i I I I i ~ : I I ~~ W _ v J- - 0 LJ I~ F . __ _~ .~~ ~~~ ~. ._; ~.~ 4 G LtJ J a +, 1 ~i~ ~ i~ G ~ ~I,,~ . !~~ i ~ ~I ~ ~;~, ,+~, ~i~ iFf, ~I~` ~ i~ j~~ !~ ~~~ ~; r ~~ i !' ~,j i E~i.i ~ + i i ~ ~ I ~ ~~~ , if t ' f , 1 ,. ~ i;hk ,# k ~ ~ i ~~ :, ,, ,~ i ~~ ; , ; ~~ i,i ~~ ~ 3i~i v ~I i ~, I I ,I ~' 4II 1 ~~ I~i,~" fI ~I i ~i i~i i ~ ~ ~~~ !'~~li~ I . !~ ~ I 'I 1 ~ i :, ~ i i i i . I ~! I ~ I ~. IIII ~I P `i. ill I ~ '~I j I ~, •~I ~~ 'ii! ;,, I ~ ' 1 4 1 ~~ i i 0 u a ti.i J' Q U y .... Q a J _o V 1 3 I aa- ~~ ~; ~. <.. Z O H Q W J W ti H ~. 3 ~ ~ 4 I I ~"' ~~ I ~~ ~~ I_~ ~~~ ~ I~ o_ i I ~~ ~~ i l n~ I ~ ~~ I I ~. ~, , . ~- iolLl~ap a ~ ~ ~(1 ,~ ~ ~,t ~ ~a ~' "' ~ ~--t :; ._J :, ~~ I I I ' iI .~~° ~ I) N ~~ ~ I I ~ I I 1 1 I . _ 0 z J~ v18 ~~ Z L_O r Q w ~- Q w ~. ,, 36994.1 B-i5t) P-266 CAS/ l i /94 113; ~~~F' F'G 1 OF 4 REC DCC SILVIA DAVIS FIl't'IN COUNTY CLERF' ?: REL`'ORDER it:iiCj RESOLDTZON OF THE_PITRIN COUNTY°COLORADO °' BOARD OF ADJUSTK8PIT GRANTING SETBACK RELIEF FOR J"OE"'6 JANET RAC2AR RESOLIITION NO. 9S-OS WHEREAS., JoL> & Janet Raczak, owners of 0234 Light Hill Road, are requesting approval for a 93 foot front yard setback variance, for construction of an addition to a single family residence; and WHEREAS, 100 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district; and WHEREAS, the subject groperty is within the unincorporated area of Pitkin County, Col4ra3o, (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 Lase Code) and Co~orac~o 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 93 foot front yard setback variance be granted for construction of an addition to a singldue to the exce tionalana r ownes a plans submitted (Exhibit "B") p s of the. property. , :,. WARNING: resultointrehearing a d pons ble revocationion may Resolution No. 94-05 Page 2 The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. DATED: April 5, 1994 The Board of Adjustment of Pitkin County, Colorado ATTEST: Suza a L. Wolf , Secretary 369943 B-(5~? F-~6i ~?5/iff94 ~~"~:~~~F' F'G i OF 4 ..r ; 364943 E~-75tj F-'268 ~j5/1ll94 f~3;~(jFi FC, 3 OF 4 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description for property owned by JOSEPH i JANET RACSAR Lot 1, Block 4, Filing 3 Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision Pitkin County, Colorado w„_~. ,,... ,. ~~ 0 W Q ~~ ~~ Q' P 3' li ~ 0 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t Z\Q 0 d' 1 ~\ / V/ h `6 ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ I C ~ / ~-, I fl f~ `_ ,~ ~~ ~ <,~ ~ 98~ ~ ~, o ~~) -~~~ ~- ~ ~~ ~ i .~bJ a ~~~ \ ~y p ~,~ I o o ~ ~~ ~. ~ _ ~ m ~~ , J 8 Q ' 3 ,_ , " ~j /; _ ~ / s `~• U ~ > 4 ~ ~ / ~ 0 'u ~ 3 ~ o~ i ~ ~ iw ' c ~ o \ ij ~~_ ~ o h S ,' ~` 4 ~' ~ . Q ~ ~ -- ~ , .r m ~N. 13° 14~ W, 71.'19 4 I~ K J .~ Q ~. ~ ~ W 2~..~Y V ~ ,~_ o7Ja24M w G ti. ~~?~4 ~~ wCOM ~RO: f~y~y~.q J W 0 `~ a W q ~, W3 W s0 ~ ~ ~ = r ~~ J ~~ ~ ~ Q ~ Q ~ > r ~J ~. ~~ ~n A c ~xf+~BiT "Q° ,: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PITICTN COUNTY'$OARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED $Y THE REQUESTED ZONING VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin County Zoning Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Heazing 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 Boazd of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of the County zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance aze invited to appeaz 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 Boazd 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, April 5, 1994; 5:15 P:M. Sheriff s Conference Room, Courthouse Raczak, Janet & Joe: requesting approval fora 93' front yard setback variance, where 100' is required in the RS- 30 zone district, for construction of an addition to a single family residence. Property Location: Lot 1, Block 4 Filing 3, Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision; 0234 Light Hill Road. ' Schmidt-Olander, Cheryl: requesting approval fora 23' front yazd setback variance and an I1' north side yard setback variance, where 100' and 30', respectively, aze required in the AF-1 zone district, for constructioti of an attached garage. Property Location: Lot 29', Crystal River Pazk Subdivision; 66 Crystal Park Drive. Bone, Lawrence: requesting approval for an 80' front yazd setback variance; a 15' west side yard setback vaziance, and a 9' east side yard setback vaziance, where 100', 30' and 30', respectively, are required'in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of a single family residence. Property Location: Lot 2, Crystal River Park Subdivision; 0044 Chair Mountain Drive. Taylor, Lawrence: requesting approval fora 78' front yazd setback variance, where 100' is required in the RS-30 zone district, for construction of a single family residence. Property Location: Lot 36, Block 2, Crystal River Country Estates. Summers, Monroe: requesting approval fora 21' front yard setback variance, where 100' is required in the AF-1 zone district, for an addition to an existing residence. Property Location: Lot 16, HoTland'Hills at Basalt Subdivision; 0088 Holland Hills Road: Duran, Manuel: requesting approval fora 40' front yazd setback variance, where 100' is required in the RS-30 zone district, for placement of a modular home. Property Location: Lot 4, Crystal' View Heights. Ho, Charles: requesting approval fora 50' front yard setback vaziance, where 100' is required "in the AF-1' zone district, for construction of a detached cazetaker unit/garage/tack room. Property Location: 0100 Woody Creek Lane. Girardi, Thomas: requesting approval fora 20' arterial highway setback variance from Highway 82, where 200' is required, for construction of a single family residence. Property Location: Ttact B, Hansen's Tracts; Township 9 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., Section 6. Maness, Jake & Sharon: requesting approval fora 15' front yard setback variance and a 15' rear yard setback vaziance, where lOb' and 30', respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, and a 62' major road setback vaziance as measured from the Highway 133 right-of-way, where 100' is required, for construction of a single family residence. Property Location: Lots• 1 & 2, Elk Mountain Subdivision; 10 Elk Mountain Drive. Fiorello, Albert & Gale; requesting approval fora 19' front yard setback variance for an access deck, a 3' front yard setback variance for a porch addition, and a 6' front yard setback variance for an exterior stairway, where a 30' front yazd setback is required is the R-15A zone district. Property Location: Lot 50', Block 2, Filing 2, Mountain Valley Subdivision; 0281 Mountain Laurel Drive. Submitted to the Aspen Times on Mazch 22, 1994. To Be Published in the Aspen Times March 25, 1994. County PO 5100113 ~. Minutes Pitkin County Board of Adjustment April 5, 1994 Members Present: Members Absent: Staff: Rick Neiley, Chair Bill Lakes Shira Geller Rod Dyer Ellie Brickham Michael Cooper John Wheeler Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Enforcement Lakes opened the meeting at 5:25 p.m.'and introduced the Board to those present. Lakes was the Acting Chair prior to Neiley's arrival. Jot and Janet Raczak were present to request a 93 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required in the R5-30' zone district, for construction of an addition to a single family residence. onnatswitchk noted that the proposed addition will include a two car garage with a master bedroom. upstairs. The house is located back on~Liglit~H11 Road, and is sited below the road. was added inaan ho her to ation.o The add tdoiveway if the garage y n will be very close to the utility easement. Janet added that the neighbors do not have any objections to the request. There was no public comment. p the em acttedL kes repot d that then v sual imps ed so as to minimize p ct is minimized, but added that he wouli~ "refer the addition to be at least 15 feet from the property line. Janet replied that a 15 foot setback would not allow them enough width for a two car garage. Gellt~ asked if they could build a single bay garage that would be two cars deep. Janet replied that such a garage would not suit their purposes for the. upstairs portion of the addition. Janet stated that the architect 'has suggested moving the garage forward to bring it away from the front setback and the easement, and to allow space for eaves. Lakes noted that he would prefer to have the addition consolidated with the existing mass of the residence, and added that the impact would be increased if the addition was moved. 1 Q Cooper stated that the lot is exceptionally narrow. Lukes added that the width of the property at one end is less than the front yard setback. Cooper moved to grant a 93 foot front yard setback variance, due to the exceptional narrowness of the property. Brickham seconded the motion, and all were in favor. Case 94-06 Cheryl Schmidt-Olander Lot 29 Crustal River Park Mary Schmidt was present, representing the owner, to request a 23 foot front yard setback variance and an 11 foot north side yard setback variance, where 100 feet and 30 feet, respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of an attached garage. Lukes read into the record a letter from Paul Markham, President of the Crystal River Park Homeowners Association, stating that the Association has no objections to the variance request. Schmidt stated that the property is located on a cliff above Highway 133, which prohibits compliance with the 100 font front yard setback. There was no public comment. Cooper noted that there was no place to locate the garage on the property without obtaining a variance. Lukes_ agreed that the garage has been sited in the least impactive location, and approved of the placement of the narrower side of the garage facing the highway. Brickham moved to grant a 23 foot front yard setback variance and an 11 foot north side yard setback variance. Cooper seconded the motion, and all were in favor. Neiley arrived at 6:00 P.M., and did not vote on this case. Case 94 07 Lawrence Bone Lot 2 Crustal River Park This case was tabled to May 3, 1994, at the applicant's request. Case 94 08 Lawrence Tavlor Lot 36 Block 2 Crustal River Countrv Estates Raymond Gotfredson was present, representing the owner, to request a 78 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet. is required in the RS-30 zone district, for construction of a single family residence. Gotfredson is the prospective buyer of the property. Gotfredson stated that he sited his residence within the required building envelope. An overhead power line crosses the lot, and 2 ,, "'' '",,: Holy Cross Electric requires that structures ;be no closer than 14 feet from the high point of the roof to the ower fine. He noted P that the corner of the house is probably too close 'to the power ....r, w,,._ line, and that he" would' not "$ave a problem with moving the footprint of the house within the envelope. Ttze Board discussed relocation of the house within the envelope, y ~ y~ 4u ~ mspppossiblento grant :~ lessertvarance than that re nested intthe 'a lication. Neiley read into the record a letter from Sohn Sebesta, an adjacent .~.~ property owner, stating that fie has no objections to the variance re est as lon ~ `~ qu g~ as the Building site is no farther east than depicted on the plans and, the building is only one story high. There taas no public comment. Neiley stated that a 30 foot front yard setback is consistent with the closest conforming zone district and with the proposed Code. A$w-=. moved to grant a 70 foot front yard setback variance, such ....v the footprint shown on the plans is not less than 30 feet from she north property line, based on downzonng and the prior 1041 approval. Cooper seconded the motion, and all were in favor. Case 94-09 .'Monroe Summery: Lot 16 Holland `bills" Monroe summers was present to request a 21 foot front yard setback variance, where l00 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of an addition to a sin le famil residence. g Y Summers stated that the Board granted a variance in May of 1993 for a new realiz deck and a remodel of the existin residence. When they Y He noted that the ?~urrentdvariancec request ris Bless than th t pr eir house during the vious variance that :ass granted: The footprint has changed, but` the same amount of square footage is involved: There was no public comment. Lukes noted that he prefers this configuration to the original one. Lukes moved to grant a 21 foot front yard setback variance, due to downzoning. Brickham seconded the motion, and'all we`re in favor. Case 94-50. Manuel Duran & Ace Lane Lot 4 Crustal View Heights David Rippe was present, representing the owners, to request a 40 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district for placement of a modular home. ...... :. ,.~, .. ,.. .,,~, .i. .-,~ ~, .. ~;, .: ,., .. t~ ka.. +ro~' rR lsc:~'''.uu*~&;k"~.d.. ~'.n~'s~*„t~k'8 ~"... .«; ,~- f Rippe stated that Lane employs Duran, and is helping him to finance this home. There is a 35 foot ditch easement through the middle of the lot to the rear of the proposed location of the residence. He also noted that the lot is much steeper towards the rear, and that the house is as far back on the lot as possible. There was no public comment. Lukes stated that the house should not be pushed closer to the ditch. Neiley moved to grant a 40 foot front yard setback variance, due to downzoning, topography and unique conditions on the property, including the ditch. Lukes seconded the motion, and all were in favor. Case 94-11 Charles Ho 0100"Woody Creek Lane Neiley did not vote on this case. Kevin MacLeod was present, representing the owner, to request a 50 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district for construction of a detached caretaker unit/garage/tack room. MacLeod stated that this application was considered by the Board in December, at which time the Board discussed approving the variance request with a condition that would restrict future development on the property. The application was tabled to allow MacLeod to consult with the owner, who decided to wait for the new Code to go into effect. However, since the new Code has not yet been adopted, the owner decided to return to the Board and to agree to the condition that was previously discussed. Neiley noted that he remembered that they were trying to preserve the viewplane across the open meadow on the property. Lukes stated that they were trying to prevent the owner from coming back for future improvements, and stressed that an owner does not have the right to build an unlimited amount of square footage if the property cannot handle it. MacLeod noted that the owners and .the neighbors all want to maintain the pasture as open space, which is why they decided to locate the caretaker unit within the front setback. The unit will be below the main residence. The owners are working with the neighbor on a landscaping plan for screening. Lukes noted that he still agrees with the Board's previous decision to require review by the Board of Adjustment for any future improvements on the property. Neiley stated that the Board can place appropriate conditions on 4 ~, u._ ~. e. , . ~_ ... ~ ;!~., ~. an approval in order to preserve the public interest. He noted that a motion could state that on the grounds of topography and in the public' interest of" preserving the viewplane, any future im rovements pp ed building envelope would 'be subject to review andeapproval by the Board 'of'Adjustment. Schaffner questioned if the Board has the authority to review a future application if"a"var"iattce=`is not being requested. She added that the meadow is outside of the owners would have to amend the building envelope, therefore, the 1041 approval in order to build outside of the envelope. She also noted thab the condition will not necessarily be referenced in the future because Board of Adjustment resolutions only apply to specific development, and will not necessarily be reviewed when future improvements are considered: recordingugincludingathe Board'ss condition ould be rgsubmtted for orkaddress future hdevelopme toofaavproperty oes nothing to limit and that tradeoffs should be made to develop one portion of a property in lieu of another. Schaffner responded that building envelopes are established in order to"limit how much of a property can be developed, and thaf a hardship must be proven for each variance granted. Neiley read the motion that was made by the Board in December, "Brickham moved to grant a 50 foot front yard setback variance based on topographical hardship and the approval of the building envelope through the 1041 Hazard Review process, with the condition that no further development` be allowed outside of the building envelope without an opportunity for future public review by this Board.." Neiley noted that the motion should include, as requested by Schaffner, that the owner be''required to' record a site plan which includes the Board of Adjustment's condition of approval in order to make the condition a matter of record. There was no public comment. Brickham moved to grant a 50 foot front yard setback variance, as noted above, including the"condition requested by Schaffner: Lukes seconded the motion, and all were in favor. Case 94-12, Tom Girardi Tract B Hansen's Tracts This case was tabled to May 3, 1994, at the applicant's request. Case 94-14. Jake & Sharon Maness Lofs l & 2 `Elk Mountain This case was tabled to May 3, 1994, pending approval of a Minor 1041 Hazard Review. 5 .., ._ ,.~:.; b5 d. -:^. .~a,~'d3~f"~; dsaF. ,,r:ur~R -~na ~~~, ~,.. e; Y ~~ fi-, :~" Case 94 15 Al & Gale Fiorello Lot 50 Block 2 Filing 2. Mountain valley Rick Neiley did not vote on this application. Al Fiorello was present to request a 19 foot front yard setback variance for an access deck, a 3 foot front yard setback variance for a porch addition, and a 6 foot front yard setback variance for an exterior stairway, where a 30 foot front yard setback is required in the R-15A zone district. Fiorello stated that they are removing the existing deck and are constructing an addition on the northwest side of the house. The entrance to the house will be relocated and the access deck will be shortened. There will be a porch where the deck reaches the house, and a staircase down to the yard from that porch along. the side of the house. All of these improvements will be located below the street and will not be visible from the street. Neiley noted that there is no other way to access the house. Fiorello stated that the existing bridge is approximately 12 feet off of the ground, and is visible from the street, therefore, the impact will actually be lessened. He added that none of the improvements will exceed. the height of the existing roof lines. There was no public comment. Lukes stated that the impacts are negligible. Lukes moved to grant a 19 foot front yard setback variance for an access deck, a 3 foot front yard setback variance for a porch addition, and a 6 foot front yard setback variance for an exterior stairway, due to topographic considerations and unique conditions on the site. Brickham seconded the motion, and all were in favor. **,t*****************************#**************#***************** The minutes of March 1, 1994 were approved as written. The meeting was adjourned at 8:0o p.m. Respectfully submitted, U~~- Suza ne L. Wolff, Secretary