HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.91.13~;,
P
~.
PITKCN CO X
BOARD OF Af5.7bSfi'1'
DATE March 16, 1991 CASE # _1L. /~
APPLICANT L+s ~G1en G'°ihe'eHYia+?~~+ ~ 2iti?'rs61'V` PRONE 927'3t59Q
MAILING ADDRESS ~ °='~'~
OWNER
MAILING ADDRESS
LOCATION OF PROPERTY _z
Any pertinent _data,, musi
made part of this Case.
it does not contain all
Applicant Signature
4
------- ., , -~- ,. .s_.,,.~ ~ . _- .i ..~->.~i~~
(To be. completed by the Zoning 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:
,~_ ~- Zone District
Requesting: Lot Size
' Height Variance, where ' is required.
Square Feet where a maxmum,of sq. ft.
~ ////
Other: /7~/U ga S~~Flot~i,C~ U~Ctav1C~ G-~~'~.2~p /
' Front Yard Setback Variance, where _~' is required.
' Rear Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required.
' Side Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required.'
' Side Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required.
is allowed.
G ~ f~ 5 ; P9~
Hardship•
Zoning Official
Application filed/ ~ ~ f Date
Notices mailed -~-~'~s-9/ J
Parcel ID #oi41~y-~~~-OD o0'~ Secretary ~~
Resolution to Building when Completed
~ Yes ~ _ ~ No
d L. 9A,ap.~~..~.~..
PHONE 927_3177
=r
2, Snc3wmaee~ Co(l~oee,/~d0 / /
this 'application, and will be
may return"this application if
.: _..,:. v..v ra rv "h r M ~.....<.:.. t ~..::.c'y_- r. w.. s,.h
~~
NOTICE OF PIIBLIC REARING
BEFORE 'THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
E
VARIANCE DESCRIBED BEL64)AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR US
'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:
Name and Address of
Applicant:
Property Location or
Description:
May 7, 1991 at 5:15 p.m.
County Courthouse, Commissioners
Meeting Room
Lynda Mariana
Box 440
Basalt, CO 81621-0440
Lazy Glen Greenhouse & Nursery
25825 Highway 82, Snowmass
Requesting approval for a variance for placement of an
identification sign to be located 33 feet from the edge of
Highway 82, where 100 feet is required per the Pitkin County Land
Use Code.
VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED.
Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X
THE P KIN COUNTY BOAR CF ADJUSTMENT
Cindy Christensen, Secretary
~ a~ mR w' `~~~:~.
Aspen/Pitkn Plannir~ "?fc.
130 South Galena
Aspen, W '81611
:a
I
carry and Ann 3auman
P 0 Box 66
,Snovrmasa, CO 81654
t
~t
f
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Ofc.
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO $1611
r
mr. Terry Kirk
Lazyvlen , tno.
25525 i.ighway 82
~noarmass, U. 81854,
{..3 ~ a b fl ~..7~. ~ q~..
,: ~ ~; »:
^. ,.4,
.::.v: - ,
. y_1 . i .. ~- ..
As soon as you know°your new address, mail this card to all the oeople,
businesses, and publlr °'~ns who send you mail. ~ "'
For pu6iiaatior§, tape ~ ,d address label over name and oid address ...,lions
and complete new address.
~ o ~ 25825 HWY 82
oa SNDWMA$S C0 81fi54
m EURDPEpP1 FLDWER MKT
z v P 0 BOX k40
BASALT C0 83621-Ci44p
$19n
Here
CHANGE O~ AD[7RF~S
REQUEST FOR `';
Correspondents, ;ci ,`
Publishers and ,~~;:~~ ~"
Businesses
.. ........... .
zlPCae
. ~~
i i-i i i 1
i
--. -_ -. n. Box R.R. Nd. Rural Boz
ZIP COda
i
r i
i r. ~ ~ i
_._
Be snreto reooM tie aCOVe new address book aC home or office
~: ~ ~
~~,
t.. .. ~
~- 5 S
~..®. ~ -
J
ZIP Code---.~`--.~ ~/_._
x0.5. C20: '1988-::0-184
XF 'A~~~(-~~-
s
,, _,.. £r. .: uuyl +u<r ,krys'x ,fi rM~ :w<ttF x i. ~~' ,. r, ld f ,va „-r..
a 925-3775
.f this cory log home in
.n. This two-story, 1,908
ms, and a 132 square Foot
nklin woodbtltning stoves
1 ~
to,napector er
they were pleased to see a sub; Finally,
terrainlevel being utilized, they tiom of C ~I
denied Ernemann's submission Associates ;
on the basis that development ~TPC witfi
review standards were not met. and ,,an al
The architect may return with, Sprii•tstaike
an amended proposal in the Ithastals
future. arcliitectui'i
~pubfic rtio~ice-
e,.axaira aaa slue ua ~cuviue+.wu uauuc:aua v:.
to be need for building for the HPCs p.
office and lock
abson & Reno
in charge of the
hitect Sven Als-
:on Anderson and
geared before the
on,
•~ ~•
Nedra
>s.~-
daae 18,1999.
Deed of Trent
Deed of TrwrC
4-Head VCR With t
• 4 Heads for clear Sped
v On-Screen Progrommin
•779-dr. CaOb-COmpetll
Pull-Ou4 Car Stere~
v Thep-HesisteM a Fader
e a0 Watta a Aulo-Revere
• Dolby B NR • 16 Prese
WEEK
talamute is
It the Aspen
en you see
ttl beautiful
1't be~able to
aaas4 i o
.an, sad tbee>:pa~ d aew. srid MB ~-
Im~e~°yb°vBvty„°d~°°t~"
-~. • BeeperlessAnswerer_
,
rd AprH9B1 +a,
T
h
omas Carl Okm, Public 14uYee - eSYCoN ..,_.
v Dual Casettes ~ Reg.
.
d
By. J. 6ci,aIDM1. DePn~ e~,~ H9.95
Pnstic rYrnYCS : .
s m'c APPxovAt.TO anlovs soi w
Id:AM ST. PaOtd T}f6 IIiVffi7108Y OP'
9'ORiC STrffi AND b"rRlACT[7aS3
IOTICIi IS HEREBY CIVffi7 that a pntide • 24
tine .iRl ffi held m wedneedq, Id~r a. ~
~gy7ag • LC
I.atamaeUv[tehegiust8A0pmhefarathe
a 1Batafe Preservatlon Cammiuse m Hr
>a4 PloorCouval C6sotbee.,IXq BaII, L10 .. '.'..
th Gelea• Btrset. Aspen. Coloxada,
b
a
e
o-
O
e
~
9
e
z a ngnest 5mn ~hNeD® St imm the
iod to rameve 9e1
-.. .. .
Y' o®dal tmmtap at FB.eaete snea eves
return. pinsueot m 3eetian st•7-708 tithe Fre
n Lana Uee RegalaGeaa. ~ .<,..;:..
nether intotmNWq eantett Hte Aaaa/
3n'p1
~
o
~
~ Park
m
na
rde. .e lso senth Cdeea
e(..4apan,
~ J-QO»szasoso. ~ ..~.. Behi
~ St
5 ~
o
~ 1'utitiel,ad in the Aspen 15mn April ZS;"1991Q .l'ubtiahatl is tae Aspa Times Aynl 29,1991 m ., -,,,: .,
T-T_--
00 T2'S -63340-205 N 1 _ 7!L~NEALTfi-'~"-"--
fESA SUBDIVISION
r 3'..S .rd"M'i~'-S. `Gx~
3` tr,
~ "~^
_:
.. Ariz ~ ~~ . ,
_ .. _
-
_ ~,,_ :.
~ EN/PtTKIN PLANNING OF~IGE ' ~ `
13tl South Gatena Street
Aspen, CoCorado 81611 '
(303)'9205090
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
City
00713 b3250-134 GMP7CONCEP7UAL '~
Y b3270-136 GMP/FINAL
C -63280-137 SUB/CONCE~PTUAL' - '
b3300-739 SUB/EINAL'
~' ~ b3310-140 ALL 2STEP APPLICATIOONS '~~-
-83320-141 ALL 7-STEP APPLIOATY6NS/ '~ '
CONSENTAGENDAITEMS
REFERRAL FEES:
00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123 63340-190 HOUSING
' 00775 -63340-763 -ENGINEERING -'~ ~ '
SUBTOTAL
County
00113` ti-631~5'd=126 .. °GMpIG~~NERAL ::.::. ~ •~' ~ _ ~.-..
'
r -83770-727 GtaP/DETAiI`ED
b3180-728 GMP/FINAL'
E -83190-129 SUB/GEyERAL
[ ~ b3200-730 SlSh/DEf~fLED
:~ -63210-131 SUB/FINhL
b3220-132 ALL 2-STEP AP'Pt(CATIO~NS
b3230-133 ALl 1STEP APPLICATIONS/ '
' CONSENTA'GENbA IfiE/dS ~
'
~
r -63450-146 80ARD
OF ADJ(1STMENT ~ ~ -~
EE
k FEES:
F
i 00125 -63340--205 . EN~IRON .". ~ ,. :::.. _ ~ _, _.
MENTAL HEALTH
00123 b3340-190 HOUSING
00113 -G3'38D-143 ENGINEERING
PLANNINGDFFICE~SaLES ~" -
' 00113 -63080-722.,..,,_.. __..
,._.. .- C{Ty/Cbt7N7Y CODE ~'
__
,..
._.,.
'-83iS9o-123 COfV1P.PCAN _..'. ,.
-63140-724 COPY FEES'
b9000-145 OTHER ~ '
SUBTOTAL j
' tt77
~~
~ _ TOTAL _
Name: ~?Z I
~>~ e
J(R{ q
>:'
/y Phone: `,~~ d~0 ] ~.
Address:. Q~ ~:~ 4"~-~:~
.. ~
Project:~
c
.. ~~-/3
_
_
X
Check # ~/
Date: ~ - /,~ /
Additionah billin
9~ - !
_ #of Haurs~
.. `~`
.~
~rES~
,~
County of Pitkin
~,
AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY
} ss• POSTING OF A VARIANCE HEARING
} BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
State of Colorado
The undersigned,
follows:
being first duly sworn, deposes and says as
I t,;yn 3 ~. ~x ilu3f
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 hea~`ing on this matter in a conspicuous place on the
subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public
way) grid that the said sign °w~as~ posted and visible continuously
from the ~~ day of /V I ~'~~C--~. 1
19~,
to the day of ~` .,' 'rte, f. r~
~' ~ ~ ,-i9
(Must be posted for at least n" ~,
inef~(9 full days before the
hearing date).
s S
Subscrib and savor to efore me
this ~ day of
-.
19~, by _. '__
WITNESS MY HAND AND OF
l~y Con)miss~.o~ expires:
's
card to all the eople,
..- ~ ps goon as you know your addressaabel o can me'and old address . ,;;tions `~
businesses, and Pubh ns who send you meB. ~_ .., .,.,,. µ 4
For publications, tape ~ , ~ ~ -
and complete new address. ~ i
First Name,M 1 lal ^ ~ A ^ ~.
YOUr Pri TYDs-I.asl Nam®, Rural BOx
gox R.R. No. No.
eme `*k~ y£i+
GJOL.. C$'~ 81664 .. zircode _.
v t E3NOWMA~~ I ; r .
, ,
i ,-~ I i
'O
Q at. Box':".. R.R. NO. Nuomieox
a u1°i ~CuRC}F`6iaN Fl.Cis ~~*„~,,~;` ziecoae
z 9 , F' t] 'BOX` 4r+"4 _ ~ ~ ~ ; I l
a BRSgLT, C0 81Ei'~'1 04kQ ~ ;-~ ~ ~ '
= ~~~" *^~ - ~ + 'tn eNeet AccountNO.l )3
.w...._. .. ~..-.- ..._
Sign -
Here . -
-- -"•- `e~aQ~ress~iook athoma of oftfca
L. 1986 RECENER 9e sure to record the aboxe"n t ~ . t ,. , ,;
PS F°~ 3576, AP t.t, m, , wt~...Nta! ,w r _ we r.n,wn rw .,~.ns~~e.::~
.- .« r „_r. .,. ~ vevw;.^.: avnvvesxrsu•#rma}r~pw.r.~ruz~ttelw+Gkd wwi.m m. o-+r-.m:weri+
.". .2 ~_ n
#332985 O
Silvia Daviss'Pitk~n~Cri`Llei^~ SDo64? PG 26
Y , c ~.0~?
RESOLUTION OF THE PI'14~N COIINTS[, COLORADO " '~
BOARD OF ADJIISTlILNT
GRANTING 'Sl~'Pg1KCK ~EF' 'F'0~2"" 1;5CNDA 1+n-tiriut `. ~' ,. ;, „';
RE50LDTION N0. 91-13
WHEREAS, Lynda Marian, owners of a tract of land situated
at 25825'Highway 82, Snowmass, requests a 67 foot Highway 82
setback where 100 feet is required per the Pitkin County
Land Use Code, in the'SR zone district for"placement of an
identification sign for Lazy Glen Greenhouse & Nursery; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is within the unincorporated
area of Pitkin County, Colorado, (as described in Exhibit
"A", attached)p and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to
grant or deny such varances',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 fohowing findings:
1. Proper notice procekiures, 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
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 RESOLOEb,by the Board of Adjustment,
that a 67 foot Highway 82 setback variance for placement of
an identification sign be granted and placement of that
sigperpthetsignlpermitbmitted marked "Exhibit B", be granted
as
WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may
result in rehearing and possible revocation.
;? -~;/
~, :.~,,-
hd"` ~ ,~ ~ i. }17 , X985 ~~S/28/9 i. 16 ~'~. Rec '5. b0 BF: 647' FF4 29
y Silvia Davis, Pit'F xr, „ity ClerF , Doc $.(jp
~' z ~
~~
~, Y
' /~ 3
~:
~~._~
>`
P '.. ,.
~ _
~~ I~~
.~.~;
~~,~
~~ <
~~~ , ~ ~ {
-; -t_ - .
_. \\
~~, ~ 490 ,
~, ,
;?~....
•~ ~``~
1~
l ,`
~ i
'~`
::,~
ll "~. ~.
4~ ' `~
t n:.
K; rF
..
~~"~ . n
~~ <
.,,,
~~
~,
,`,\
`~ ,\\ ti.
'~
1 ~\
\ --S~ `~
~'
,.. i.r o.
~~~, ~ ,.
~:;~
~,. ~,
.. ,~,
,<:
C' ' ~~'
' ~ ;:~' ry~'r ~ .
~. •~.
~~~.
~~ '/
P`
,~' = ~,t
?. ,
~. ,
C.. ' ~ `-1
Minutes
Pitkin County
Board bf'`Adjustment
Msy'7, 1991
Members'Present: Kandi Shaffran, Chairman John Ostwald"
Stan"Mathis ' Evan Gull
Ted Guy
Members"Absent; Rick Neiley
Joanna Schaffner, of the Pitkin County Zoning Office, was present with
staff recommendations and comments.
Shaffran opened tkie meeting at 5:20 p.mand introduced the Board to
those present.
_. T n:;.0. ..~ T,... .I'.,. yTaT ,... _ .. .. . _. '~,
This case was continued from the April 2, 1991 meeting. Scott Lindenau,
architect, was present representing the ~anell's:` Lindenau presented
the Board with reviewed architectural drawings. The banell''s a're''iiow
PitkintCount 2LandtiJseght variance; where `12 feet is required, per the
y ~ Code, for construction of a detached residential
garage.
Lindenau briefed the Board
meeting:' changing the fouz
the breezeway from 26 feet
Lindenau had the house and'
could visualize the'propos
what was req~Yested at'"the'
were made to the plans for
on the changes ~
-car garage: to a
1 L, 1J JJ
is meeting.
Board
that
Bruce Hazard, from Design Workshop representing the adjacent neighbor
stated that they have rso problem wt"h`the request being made and fees
is
that the trees that Wildcat Ranch were concerned with are to 'be
preserved.
Shaffran commented that she still cannot see a hardship on this request,
that it seems, more of a request for'aesign rather £han hardship.'
Guy asked how far Lindenau would have to move everything back to be in
. ~. ,..
conformance and Lindenau stated ~between`6`to`ff'"feet.
After further. discussion, the Board "stated that they still could not
find a hardship for this request.
1
~., ..,.~.- .. ...... .::... .. .: ~ ..r,~ ..> .o.: ,,,
~~ ,
Guy made a motion to deny the request for a two foot height variance,
where 12 feet is required per the Pitkin County Land Use Code, due to
lack of hardship. Mathis seconded the motion and all were in favor.
Case #91 18 Dickinson Jeff & Priscilla Block 2 Lot 22 Crustal River
Country Estates -
Jeff Dickinson was present to request a 28 foot front yard setback
variance for construction of a single-family residence, and a 78 foot
front yard setback variance for construction of a proposed detached
garage, where 100 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district.
Dickinson briefed the Board as to why the request was being made by
showing the topography of the land.
Four letters were submitted into the record: Noel J. Minor, Tom
McBrayer, Roger Zastrow, and the Architectural Control Board. All these
letters were in favor of the request, except for the '78 foot front yard
setback requested for the garage.
Gull asked if there were any covenants that Dickinson had to abide by.
Dickinson stated that there was just an Architectural Review Committee.
Tom Newland, Assistant to the County Manager, commented on the problems
of drainage that occur in this area.
Shaffran asked for public comment; there was none. Dickinson also
mentioned that he had met with all the neighbors about his request.
Dickinson stated that he would be willing to drop the carport (garage)
from the application. Gull stated that he would be willing to grant a
50 foot variance.
Guy made a motion to grant a 28 foot front yard setback variance for
the construction of a proposed single-family house and a 50 foot front
yard setback variance for construction of a detached residential garage,
with the condition that the garage be built within the building envelope
as shown on the approved Minor 1041 approval plat filed in Plat Book 26,
Page 30, due to topographical hardship and downzoning. Shaffran
seconded the motion and all were in favor.
~a~~ - - ~..~ .,__.. --- ---- -
Frank LaGeoia was present to request a`Highway 82 setback variance for
p ication_sign. LaGeoia stated that he did have
alsigneup thatnwasetoof big a`nd"'was illegal. LaGeoia submitted a copy
of the proposed new sign, which is in compliance with the sign code of
the Pitkin County Land Use Code. The new sign will be placed in the
position that the old sign was located, and will be eight feet high from
the existing grade.
Guy made a motion to grant the sign permit as requested and to grant a
67 foot Highway 82 setback variance for placement of this identification
sign. Ostwald seconded the motion and all were in favor.
2
.. 't
.c
xoger merman was present to request a 84
variance, where 100 feet is required"in the
construction of a single-family residence:
Sherman reviewed the plans for the proposed
family 'residence.
Shaffran asked if anyone from the public was
no one was. ^-
e Ranch Acres Subdivn #3
faot front yard setback
AP'-1 zone district, for
location of.the singie-
present with comments and
After a brief discussion, Ostwald moved to grant a 54 foot front yard
varia
forbconstructnce, where 100 £eet is required, in the 'AF-1 zone district
ion of a single-family residence, due to downzoning and a
.. ,.~
topographical hardship. Shaffran 'seconded"`t`he motion and all were in
favor. ,. .
Vance and°`E11en Grenko, and Lennp'Oates A~~orney for the applicants,
were present to request a'7 foot. height variance, where 12 feet 'is
required per the Pitkin County Land Use Code, for construction of an
accessory structure'.
Oates stated that this area has floodplain problems, vegetation
problems, hillside problems; and the additional problem of the railroad
,~..~. .
right-of-way, which he believes is a topographic feature land needs"to
be preserved.' Oates also stated that there are'many letters in the file
approving this request. °-
Vance Grenko went into further detail for the request and showed the
Board the site plans which show`'that tie proposed location of the
accessory structure is the only place where it can be built:
36a acres asked how large the property was and Grenko stated that it was
haffran also asked why this was not considered a barn.
Schaffner distributed the `c`~efiniton of a barn to the Board per the
. :_ .. ..
Pitkin County Land Use`CO`de which~~`tates:
Barn. A building used to shelter or .enclose livestock, poultry,
feed, or field equipment acce's'sory to eaisfing agricultural
operationsppprovided, hogeyei, '°i~a~"-~. in no event ~ shall any floor
s ace be a lied to residential uses.
Oates stated that this is an accessory structure because it does not
_,W„.. ..r,...~,.
fall within the guidelines of ~a barn, therefore, they would 'need"a
variance. Oates referred to the photograph submitted in the file,
showing the steep cliff that goes up to a mesa, on top of the property,
which is_not accessible year round. '
c^-drew.- +nw.. .. ..,.,.. ..a,, x~... ..:.: ,. .,.., u. .:_; ., ,f,F ~ ~ep.~ ~...
Shaffran stated that the protlem isn't where Grenko wants to locate the
accessory structure, but the`height of this structure. Gull also stated
3
;rY~ .,., :, ., , .~.,.~f ~ w~ ~,~a~ ~
~, ..~yh, ~.br r. ~~ t ':
,~,
..
that the Code prohibits
accessor cstructures tosexceedla limit ofWl2tfeet'ahd that the Code is
y
very specific in its intent. Guy stated that he can't find a'bardship
to this request.
Oates stated that if this structure were moved, it would encroach on
the historic railroad right-of-way and should be preserved. Ellen
Grenko stated that there are also three large conifers on this land that
would be ruined if this proposed structure were moved.
Shaffran asked if anyone from the public was present to comment; there
was no public comment.
Grenko stated that his intent is to build a beautiful structure.
Shaffran stated that if the Board voted on design, then it would be
unfair to any applicant if the Board imposed their taste on their
design, therefore, the Board goes strictly by the guidelines in the Land
Use Code, which states a hardship has to be proven (i.e., topographical,
downzoning or solar access).
Shaffran stated that the Grenko's could argue the interpretation of a
barn or an accessory structure, but that is the only other recourse in
this request.
Grenko asked if an orchard is considered an agricultural operation.
Schaffner stated that just because there is an orchard on the property,
does not necessarily make it an agricultural operation. Schaffner than
read into the record the definition of an agricultural operation.
Grenko stated that he does not plan on using the structure for a
residential use. Gull commented that office and hobby uses are
classified as residential uses and could not accept this structure as
a barn as it is referenced on the submitted plans.
Guy asked for Schaffner to read the part of the Land Use Code which
states what criteria the Board of Adjustment can grant a variance.
Oates stated that the Board is seeing hardships as the topography of
the lot, as he is seeing other features of this lot, i.e., the
floodplain area, the existence of an historic railroad right-of-way and
the existence of an orchard and vegetation which should be considered.
Gull stated that even if this structure were to be built on a flat piece
of ground, the Board would still not be able to find a hardship. The
point is that the Grenko's want a two-story accessory building, which
the Land Use Code does not allow.
Oates asked if the Grenko's are permitted a barn. Schaffner stated that
being in the RS-30 zone district, they are allowed a 28 foot high barn.
After further discussion, Shaffran moved to table this case until the
next meeting on June 4, 1991. Guy seconded the motion and all were in
favor.
4
,,..„
_. ~ ....~ ... .._ ~r.~ i ..."~ . ~;~
.. 1 '.. ~!. ~. i
~°
g_ ~ a'r _ .,~_
Kitty Boone and Mickiael Thompson, 'Architect, were present to request a
30 foot southwest side yard setback variance and
a 30 foot
side yard setback variance where'S0 feet for both is re i northeast
qu'red in the
RS-30 zone district, for construcfon of a single-family residence.
e area. TTiompsori stated` that this
p to be a two be on th
T om son briefed the Board,droom `home, 'one-story'`high and fits within
structure is
the 20 foot setbacks that are"required in the subdivision plat.
Shaffran asked for public comment. Bill Landman and Leo Huber, were
.. r. ., .~ ~~-. ~.,k. .a,
present as adjacent homeowners ~andmari requested the Board`to conduci;
a site visit; Huber agreed. Shaffran stated that the Board has been out
in the Gateway Mesa area, "and all are very familiar with the site.,
therefore, feel that a site visit is not warranted. Shaffran suggested
Boone stake out the house and meet with'"the neighbors wY'o are'"concerned.
~,..,
Gull stated that because of dealing with this su"bdivision'many~times,
and that this'is a classic application of downzoning, 'he would not have
an objection to granting it right away.
Gull also stated that Boone is subject to an architectural review
committee in this subdivis"ion, and that would be the. more appropriate
way to address the concerns of the,neignbors.
After a brief discussion, Guy moved to grant a 30 foot southwest side
yard setback variance and a 30 foot`,northeast side yard"setback variance
due to downzbnng, as on the plans submitted: Mathis seconded 'the
motion. All were in favor with Ostwald abstaining, ~~" ~'
case TF71-li. tsoara of county Commissioners 0205 Redstone Boulevard
fronteyard ~ tback var ancey wheree30 feet~iserequi gdquast an 8 food{
nd a 7 fb
north side and setback variance where 10 feet~is re uired in the B-
1 zone district, for construction of public restroom facilities at the
Redstone Park'.
Newland spoke briefly of the history on
..~~ ~.._
received approval from the ~tedston2'Histor.
There is an existing County"dike that runs'
Crystal River is behind that dike. The 1
proposed where it is because of the exist:
playground, picnic areas, and general ope
restroom design is to make it appear as a
existing museum. Newland further`explaned
the project.
cal Preservai
typical ou
the design ~
Newland has
z Committee.
arty and the
re§troox` ' is
park; i.e.,
tent of the
ding 'to the
restrooms.
Shaffran asked if an one was
adjacent property own r to Redstone Park rstated th tl he was oppbsedn,
'to
the variance as it would"be~`£oo close to his ro ert line and th
... .: .. P p Y at
this is less than a pleasant type use. Klein stated that he felt
putting the restrooms within a cou~Sle feet of his property Fine is not
5
.. ~... ~ ,,.,~ ..~a:~> ri
,~.,
right and could possibly diminish the value and enjoyment of his
property. Klein is the only property owner that a restroom facility
would affect (no matter where the location of the restroom).
Guy stated that because there are other possible locations, and given
that the single property owner that this would affect has a problem with
this location, cannot grant this variance. Shaffran agreed.
After further discussion, Guy made a motion to deny the variance as
requested due to lack of demonstrated hardship. Mathis seconded the
motion and all were in favor with Ostwald abstaining.
case 71-17 P1V14~A 1J.wiaa a. ~. u ..+. .. ++~. -- ---- -- ---
Gideon Kaufman was present to request an 88 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.
Guy commented that his office did the structural engineering for this
applicant. He stated that he believes that this should not create a
conflict since the work is already done and would place an unfair
hardship if Guy and Mathis disqualified themselves (since there would
be no quorum on this case). It was decided that there was no conflict
and both could vote on this case.
Kaufman stated that this is an existing non-conforming lot (7/10 of an
acre) which the County downzoned to AF-1. The Molasky's want to place
the addition under the existing deck and want to add about 400 square
feet to an existing 1,700 square foot house.
Kaufman submitted three letters of support from the neighbors into the
record.
There was no one from the public present for comment.
After further discussion, Shaffran moved to grant an 88 foot front yard
setback variance and a 5 foot side yard setback variance, as on the
plans submitted, due to downzoning. Ostwald seconded the motion and all
were in favor.
Erin Hazan was present representing the Radom's as purchasers o e
Grady property to request a 52 foot front yard setback variance and a
25 foot north side yard setback variance, where 100 feet and 30 feet,
respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district for construction
of a proposed addition to a single-family residence.
Mathis commented that Guy and Associates was approached by the Radom's,
potential buyers, on being their architects. They were not hired, but
Mathis did speak to them about their property and gave them ideas. He
believes there is no conflict and the Board agreed.
6
. > ;~ ,,
,. ., ±.
Hazan stated that some of the hardships are that this is a very small
house to begin with. one,side of the property has a 30 inch culvert
that restricts building on that side, on the other side is an
irrigation cYtch that has historical value and is 8 feet deep.
Therefore, the proposed location is the only location for the
addition. Hazan also submitted into the record letters from the
neighbors supporting this request.
Mathis has been on the site and so has Ostwald and realize the
difficulties of this site. 5ha~fran asked if there was `any public
comment and there was none.
After further discussion., Shaffran moved to grant a 52 foot front yard
setback variance and a 25 foot north side yard setback variance,' as
p plans submitted, due to exceptional physical hardships
indfavortical"difficulties, Ostw'ald seconded the motion and all were
q
south aside a and s tback3varianceroant yard setback variance, a 30 foot
Y nd a 20 foot north side yard setback
variance where 100 feet, 50 fe
familyeres Bence, RS-30 zone dist et acid 56 feet, 'respectively, are
rict for construction of a single-
There was no one present to represent this case, but the Board felt
that this was a typical downzoning case for Gateway to Snowmass.
A er a brief discussion, Gull m
setback. variance a 30 foot south owed to grant a 13 foot front yard
'side yard setback variance and a 20
foot north side yard setback variance, as per the plans submitted, due
to downzoning and topographical hardship. Guy seconded the, motion and
all were in favor.
The minutes of the April 2, 1991 meeting were approved as written.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
f
.~~~
Cindy L. hristensen, Secretary
7
Kandi Shaffran, Chairman