HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.91.30MAILING ADDRESS ~,., 4 ro r ,; ~,,. f,.~ . ,, s,...~, i _ .,•,.;..G ,.....,.:u hwt,a ~~„~ 1,. „> .:,.:.
OWNSR ,~,.~"iUGG~p/t' UU~','QAN'i',~q[A1/f~G ~`~PHOND r
MAILING ADD~ESS t~ ~ r ~~ X-~ ~ J ~i~Le~~ 5 d A D5 !a//
_. »r, o-, v .+s~.1,9Nsam d^ss?#1~v.~?~s°4:6*.5 ~.,9 vu; .i..
LOCATION OF PROPERTY ,_ C7 ~ ~ 7J ~ ~ U ~ ~ 7~
Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be
made part of this Case`: 'The Board may return this, application if
it does not'cantan alI the fads in question.
~s:, ;.. ~.:.
Applicant Signature _~ ~~ ~ ~ "" -- `~ ~ ~
(To be _conpleteci by the. Zoning Department)
Provisians'of the zoning resolution requiring the Zoning Official
to forward this application, to tYe Board of Adjustment, and
reasons far not granting a building permit: .Zane District
Requesti.ngc ~ Lot Size,.
cJ~ ' Front Yard $etliack Variance, where J00 ' is required.
-t ~ Siard Setback Variance, where ' is required.
Rear
„ ..,.. ,.
de Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required.
y de Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required.
~ gttiz'ed.'
Height Variance, where '} is re ._
Square Feet where a maXimum of sq. ft. is allawecl.
Other:, ,
,..- 7 r..:'-Mmrn s~ r+w.'x-„s==, ,er..~.:.AZ .Gx .r.n. .d;.,¢, ~Srf», .y.. a .hv. ,..
'Hardship ~ .., _... _,. ,e , >.ao bn,....,.N ~ ...,,~M.,:
Zoning OfficialS~~-~!~W-~,
Application, filed ~~I Date
Notices mailed ~{f '1 ~'~',!_,
Parcel. Tp ~~~ 7~(~ 0~ i Secretary -°
~~. "~.~~~aa~
Resolution to ~tuilding when Completed I~I es I_.I No
W~c]µm Uratait~nll7r.+vr~7r7pm~,int
E~1Ea E'„ '6•lymstiw F-lve~,, Si.iit:c~ ],r:~~"
!-a~Faen, (:;oic~r~-~do E~9.Fa]:1
I
Trine-+ ita~, 7.9~].
F='i.•k.l•::in Cor,inty
X'rotard r,f ~c:lj'u~•tm~:+nts
1~2ec G'7C71^cirarr Mi:l:7.tur- r•f+r>:i.rir~nt:r,
Utic+ ltr 1,ite ~i.~capn~+as a:sf •l•17e tsltca <•~r5cl i;ht+ Qniy ~vG"taiahl:e
•xc•r..r:+=+=_+ wr= i'F+r7~x~zst ~a pmt h,:~~:1: varianc~+ from SC)t'a p~a~t: nrri mr~~ ~rnri~k
y=zr°cl =>c~t. taarlc_1.:ra a 1Cy foot fr•or7•k: y<-tr•d ~c=} h=ick,
"I-hr:> r•ecaixe,t for !-;cat b=+c:k: v~ar~~nce ].~ dixe tci e;;trame tir~rdshi.~
for e:drtuur•<>„ fho ~>:i:ti=+ is, apprcar.m~t~l.y iCr arras gni:nr! i'rrim =gin
exa=,tir7r~ ciky «~ppi dve+d i•caG~d accassin I_o~ Ncaa sithdrva=,inn
(:,iky o•f F1<,j~c-ih T.".olrrc-~do whic:!•t zs =_sh`~~rerl' h the"G~rc~c~n''I`~x11er• g,
arra ar°k, which i.=.:, nrimecl (Jte 1
G' p' y - p~arte}. g G~, which .G~ 7:i~~ix:~1"
G ~
tkhi ourht:i nii 9: sr, ericlrssad. "I"hc> icat.- avai^ai~as abcri..ik G?'/. ,lops
J L17c-+ ~rr•trr~ propr=r•L•y cao9.nr~' up f:h~ hi.ll ~~ncl goirir~ ravrr •k.hr~
•r op of 'utr_•+ frail .
G { ~~
only ,-~vai.7.r-xhle kaui~.dinr~ s>~:k~ whir_h x~ appriaverl kMrci`ur,~h ~
FCrpi rc+viE"'w iss ak tt7t~ v~!ry nort.l7er"•ty t3:~~ of L:7ii~ nrc:a)~c-±r'iy
• P~rai rlt~i Inca on klie apXar•nvad ra ty roarJ. Wa ar•e r~±rltir ~k.:i.nt.] 1Cr •foraP:
a
'kolth~c.F:: from kha nnrt,har7.y property ia.nc~ as Xrhak as the arrr~~=_;
~+ r•tt>=arI and 1-ha hixiiclini~ wnu7.c1 hao hi.ii~t xri•4;:n kfi~"!•bti71.~1.'cl~,'
kaari• ft"nrn Ih's~'f: pni.nk. aX.iowa.ht~ fcrr•' hhra p<arL,xnr~ tca ht-~ kri.+kwaari`i:ha
rgG-~,rl ~:uid t.l-ic~ <.1:ri.xc•ki.ira^ _
a•_ncar°aa, y,,
~7rrtihn Ft„ Wedurn'
~'Y[Ap ~vt ~'4?r`
t.. ,..; a
...:. ~ a„~,,. ~ i
~!~ ,y~ HOJACENT OWNER'S STATEMENT
.oradooherebylcertifies thedfollowngslst~isea current elistnofladjacentaproof
owner s feet of the NEWFOUNDLAND LODE aS obtained from the most current Pitkin County
a Assessors iax Rolls. Petty
NAMES AND ADRESSES
----.-__ SRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SMUGGLER DURRANT MINING CORP. A
P.O. BOX 533 NEWFOUNDLAND LODE
CROSS RIVER, NEW YORK 10513
ASPEN SKIING COMPANY
P.O. BOX 124B NEWFOUNDLAND LODE, SIIVERCREST LOOS
;r;
ASPEN, COLbRA00"f31612
COUNTY OF PITKIN `
506 E. MAIN STREET SILVERCREST LOSE, HARRTSON LODE
ASPEN, COLORADO 31611
SAVANNAH IIMITEO PARTNERSfiIP
SUITE 1100
1300 NORTN 17TH STREET
ROSSLYN, VIRGINIA 22209
HARRISON.MINING AND MIMING COMPANI'
#23
210 SOUTH GALENA STREET
ASPEN, COIORADO''II1611
MR. I.G. OAVIS, JR.
110 S. MARION AVc'NUE
VENTNOR, NEW JERSEY OB406
ROBERT W. HOIJARD'
CAROL HOWARD '
31 DANIEL COURT '
RIDGEW000, NEW JERSEY 07450
JANE Z. FRAZER
?B21 CLAREHONT BOULEVARD
3ERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94705
IOSEPH S. ZALUBA
20NALD -
'.0. B(
i~^EN.
KING BEEE, SpgR LODE
HARRISON LODE
LOT 2, NOAO SUB.
UNIT A, HOAG CONDO
UNIT B, HOAG CONDO
~~~ 3, HOAG
.:
Ta ~a.l>~~~,,.,
Y .. .. .~'WT M
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NEWFOULAND 'LODE MINING CLAIM,
U.S.M.S. 51'90, ,_ ,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that Northeasterly triangular portion of said
Mining Claim lyi.'ng and shown on the PIat for the 'Hoag"Subdivision, in
Plat F3ook 4 at Page 218, and that portion contained
inside the 'triangular portion, set aside and described as a Public
Trail, and further excepting all the Southwesterly portion of said
Mining Clai.'m, described in Lease to The Aspen Skiing Corporation
229 ,at Page 308.
recorded in Book,
_.:
COUNTY OF PITKIN',
STATE OF COLORADO
d.
"; _ _, .
-,
~,~
~~
~.
To: Pitkin Co. Board of Adjustment
From: Phyllis. H. Xoteen, President
_..
Smuggler-Durant"Flirting Co.
Date: , June 8, 1991
I 9
set back variance
am aware of the
being applied
for by Gordon Miller
on the .
site off Ute Ave. at the Nordic Ski trail.
I approve of this variance . ~,, ,_ }~Q'~,y \~`~ ~ ,,,\
Phyllis H. Koteen
., ,,. I
._, .
.. , . .:. .A xt~A .. ~I±A:4 .;,
~:. .. .. ~, sr,_„ .... ~ .~,~ ., em..-;.tea...-~.
LAND"USE APPUCATIbN FEES
cuy
00713 -53250-134 GMP/CONCEPTUAL
I -63270-136 GMP/FINAL
-63280-737 SUB/CONCEP7UAl
0 L
-63320-141 AL
1-STEPAPPL16A710NS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ',
f' REFERRA~FEESi
(( 00125 -63340.205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123 63340-190 HOUSING
f 00115 X3340-163 ENGINEERING
k SUBTOTAL
County
00113 -63160-125 GMP/GENERAL
- -63170-127 GMP/DETAILED
-63180-128 GMP/FINAL '
-63190-129 SUB/GENERAL
-63200-130 SUB/DETAILED
-63210-131 SUB/FINAL
-63220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPLICA710NS
-63230-133 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/
-~ ~ CONSENTAGENDAITEMS
6345014e J BOARDOF ADJUSTMENT
REFERRAL FEE S: '
-00125. -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123-, -63340-190 HOUSING
00113 ' -6330-143 ENGINEERING'
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
~
00113 -63080-122 CITYlCOUNTYCODE
-63090-123 COMP. PLAN '
13140-124 COPY FEES
19000-145 ~
OTHER --
'
tom
SUBTOTAL
&
TOTAL
~/} l } /
~%i:/ ~ /
'
~ ~
Name: s
r
+
( yR~;
Phone:
Address:
r
/
Project:_ °~/FI+' / r~
L
.
Check# ~ ~~~ Date: r ~!" - ~~~" -~~~
Additional billing: #ofHours: _._,~.
~K yr ~ ~Y a~~~.
1 0~ .
County•of Pitlcin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY
} ss. POSTING OF A VARIANCE HEARING
State of Colorado } BEFORE THE PITKIN COIINTY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
The undersigned, being first duly •sworn, deposes and says as
follows: ,/~
I, J4l~ii ~ K ~~ -~~ ~ , 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 ~ ?J' day of J ~ ~ E 19 1l ,
to the Z~ day of ~ L-~ 19~.
(Must be posted for at least nine (9) full days before the
[.~C.J S.
Applicant's SignatL
Subscribed and sworn `to before me
this ~ day of V~-~--• ,
;; ~ ~,:. ~:, ~_, WITNESS MY HAND AND -`JFF'ICIAL S1:AL.
~, ~ ~ ~"
-~~._~ <
' ~ i',~~'
~ My Commission expires: _~-~~- -~
•- ~
otary Public's Signature
Address ~ ~p
~IeR. CO ~18~1
"~` '` #3344 07/id/91 C'19d"1}` Fec ~.Od 650 FS X95 ,
Silvia Davis, 'Pit4:in' Cnty 'Cler4:~ Doc ~:d~i
RESOLIITION OF THE PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO
BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT
GRANTING'$ETBACK'RELIEF FOR GORDON MILLER
RESOLIITION NO. 91-30
WHEREAS; Gordon Miller, owner of a tract of land situated at
Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, U.S.M.S. 5190, requests a 90 foot
front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required, for
construction of a single-family residence; and"
WHEREAS, the subject property is within the unincorporated area of
Pitkin'County, Colorado, (as described in Exhibit "A", attached);
and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant
or deny such variances by virtue of Title II, Section 16-1.3,
Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code) and Colorado Revised Statutes,
1973, 30-28=118(2) (C); and,
WHEREAS, based on the evidence presented, the Board of Adjustment
makes the following findings:
1. Proper notice procedures, including the
notification of all adjoining property owners,
has been shown by the applicant.
2. The required hardship or practical difficulty
has been established.
3. Granting such relief will not cause substan-
tial detriment to the public welfare and will
not substantially impair the intent and
.purpose of the Zoning Resolutions and the
.zoning maps.
NOW, TFTEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment, that a
90 foot'- front yard setback variance be granted to allow for
construction of a single family residence, as shown on the plans
submitted (Exhibit "B"), due to topographical hardships.
WARNTNGZ Any"violation of the terms of this resolution may
result in rehearing and possible revocation.
#3~~~39 U7/1U/41 U9:17 F:ec ~.U~~`iK 650 PG 996
Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk; Doc $.U<!
Resolution 91-,3c7
Page 2
The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of
the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado.
DATED: July 2, 1991
ATTEST:
Ci y L. Christensen,
Secretary
The Board of Adjustment
of Pitkin County, Colorado
Ka "i Sha f an,
Chairman
.- .
.',~ ~( 7~~
LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
AReli.ane Gap+K.~i1n'n,~Cmpwrv '
#334439 07/10/91 09:17 ReC S.C?O PIS 650 F'G 447
Silvia Davis, Fitkin Cnty Clerk:, Doc x.00
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
NEWFOULAND LODE MINING CLAIM,
U.S.M.S. 5190,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that Northeasterly triangular portion of said
Mining Claim lying and shown on the Plat for. the Hoag Subdivision, in
,, ,., .,
Plat Book 4 at Page 218, and that portion contained ~- aid
inside the triangular portion, set aside and described as a Public
Trail; and further excepting all the Southwesterly portion of s
Mining Claim, described in Lease to The Aspen Skiing Corpdration
recorded in Book 229 at Page 308.
COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO
c
#334439 G. / 1G/91 G9: 1' Ftec ~. GG ELY.. 65th ~FG 998
Silvia Davis, F'i.t4::in Cnty Clerk:, Doc ~.GG
EXHIBIT "B"
=/
.~ ..
~.
2~
o,
~i
~:
~~ , ~
( Building Env a `~ ~D'
/, b4
_ I Ce eo-D_.L ~ _
~~ ~ _ \ .
~ / ~ . ~~.
~ ~' /~
/ N /
/ w ProPe~tY Linas -~ //
__..~ ____... ~___. I ._~
B~Yu ~ 11 / .
_ _ ~5.,~
/ban-.....___..._.~..- ~tleea ..
i.~~~ c. iiv •~w~ •i..t
Site Plan
~.
._ ,~, , .
~, -
oPertY Linac
;~
/ .~i
/ ..
/~~ ~ / ~.
~:.
/.
• /
_j/`,/~ ~ ji HOAG SUBDI VIS~t1 / ~
l,~ % ~ i
//I' 'i ~
/~~
~ ~~
~: ~~ ,;-.
` b~ca6 S
e .. ~ //
eo / i /
m ~
Q / I ~
~ / _;%
U` /
~ ~ r
/ ~ ~~
~..
,' ~~ , •~'
' BJ50 ~ /6J'10 /
• /.
..
i /
~~w;.._
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF AD5'USTM"E27?`
TO .ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED "
..~,,n
ZONING VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW:
Pursuant to Patkin,,,County Zoning Resolution of,June 5, 1955, as
amended, a'Public Hearing will 'be held in the District CotiYrtroom, Pitkin
County Court House., Aspen, Colorado, (or at such other place as the
g may then be adjourned) to consider an application fiAed with the
meetin
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; p'ar'ticularly if you have objection to such variance, as the
Board of Adjustment will ive serious consideration to t
surroundi he opinions of
5 P P Y
rant or den r the re nest sfor varianceaffe A VARIANCE G ing whether to
g Y q REATER`_ TH~23 OR
LESS THAN 'THAT REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED.
DATE AND TIME OF MEETING: July 2, 1991 at 5:15 p.ln.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Ziff, William; requesting a 45 foot .front yard setback variance, where
100 feet is required in the RS-20 zone district, for construction.. of a
barn. Property Location: Lot R-53-A, Starwood Seven Exemption.
Mayer, Chuck: requesting a 20 foot west side yard setback variance,
where'30 feet is required in the AF=1 zone district, for construction
of a residential garage. Property Location: Lot 1, Block 1, Filing 1,
Brushcreek Village Subdivision.
Pojman, Raymond: requesting a 30 foot front yard setback variance,
where 10o feet is required in the RS-30 zone district, for construction..
of a single-family residence. Property Location: 170 Crystal Country
Circle, Crystal River Country Estates,"Carbondale,
Pfister, Arthur: requesting a 16 foot height variance, where 12 feet
is required per the Pitkin County Land Use Code., for construction of a
barn. Property Location: West Buttermilk.
Alcitare, Gaston: requesting a l0 foot front yard setback variance,
where 30 feet is required in the R-30 zone district, for construction
of a proposed addition. Property Location: Lot 10, Block 4, Red
Mountain Ranch.
Miller, Gordon:' requesting a 90 foot froht paid setback variance, where
100 feet is required, for construction of a single-family residence.
Property Location: Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, U.S.M.S. 5190.
Donze, Donald: requesting three separate variances -- 1) 30 foot front
yard setback variance for an existing storage shed; 2) 25 foot front
yard setback variance, 10 foot east side yard setback variance and a 10
--.
foot rear yard setback variance for construction of a proposed shed; 3)
7 foot west side yard setback variance and a 10 foot rear yard setback
variance for construction of a mobile home addition. Property Location:
Lazy Glen #44.
Renney, Mary: requesting a 7 foot side yard setback variance, where l0
feet is required, in the SR zone district, for construction of a
proposed addition to a mobile home. Property Location: Lazy Glen #15.
Submitted to the Aspen Times on June 18, 1991.
To Be Published in the Aspen Times on June 20, 1991.
County PO #51706
-~
Minutes
Pitkin County
Board of Adj'u'stment
July 2, 1991'
ers Present: Kandi Shaffran, Chairman
Memb
Stan Mathis ~~
Ted Guy
Members Absent: Evan Gull
Rick Neley
John Ostwald
Joanna Schaffner, of the Pitkin County Zoning Office, was present
with'staff recommendatiori'S and comments.
Shaffran opened the meeting at 5:20 p.'m.`and introduced the Board
to those present. -
Case #91-15, Grenko, Vance & Ellen, 0032 A'v'alanche Crk Rd,
Grenko advised the Board that since the May 7 meeting, he engaged
several professional people to prove that the only buildable area
for this accessory structure is the one being proposed. Grenko
also submitted` a letteY from Jerome Gamba & Associates, Inc.
Michael`Gamba is a water engineer an$'prepared a map tkiat' Grenko
submitted into the record verifying that ttie` only location this
structure can be built is tle'one Tieing requested. '" "°"'
Shaffran reiterated that the location is not the problem, but the
height 'is the problem.
Grenko again stated that the floor area that is needed can 'only be
utilize with his pro~sosed"structure and`that all of'`th~e neighbors
in the vicinity support his request:" "`
Shaffran" xdade `a motion to take this case off" the 'table, ' i
seconded the motion and all were in favoY.' Vance" Grenko ~
present to request a 7 foot height variance for construction'of
accessory structure, _ ~:.w , ,,, _,. ..;
Shaffran asked for public
Vicki Lee and Pat'Zohinge
Lee' and'Zollinger support
believes that the nature o
11 neighbars'wth everyone
very site spec
its =- "-"river,
is spoken with
ti's request.
ting
that
out bf the
1
-,
Nicki Lee, a neighbor across the river from the Grenko's, supports
this request stating that this would be nicely done, and be
consistent with the look of the area.
Ostwald stated that he passes the property everyday and you would
not be able to see this structure from the highway during the
summer months.
After further discussion, Neiley moved to grant a 7 foot height
variance, due to topographic hardships, per the plans submitted,
as recommended in the letter from Jerome Gamba and Associates.
Shaffran seconded the motion and all were in favor.
Case #91-30, Miller, Gordon, Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim,
U.S.M.S. 5190
Shaffran stated that she has a conflict with this case, so will not
be voting. Neiley was acting chairman. Randy Wedum was present,
representing Gordon Miller, to request a 90 foot front yard setback
variance, for construction of a single-family residence. Wedum
briefed the Board as to the location of the property and the
proposed location of the barn. Wedum stated that Miller wants to
use the existing road that is already cut and services two
properties. Wedum stated that the proposed site is the only
buildable site, therefore, the request for the setback.
Wedum showed the Board the actual site plan, with the building
envelope and the proposed location of the house. This site has
received a 1041 approval for the building envelope.
Neiley asked if there was any public comment and there was none.
After further discussion, Mathis moved to grant a 90 foot front
yard setback variance, for construction of a single-family
residence, due to topographical hardship, as on the plans
submitted. Guy seconded the motion. All were in favor.
Case #91-24. Ziff, William. Lot R-53-A, Stanwood Seven Subdivision
Joe Wells was present, representing Mr. Ziff, to request a 45 foot
front yard setback variance, in the RS-20 zone district, for
construction of a barn, on a 73.6-acre tract, adjacent to the
Stanwood Subdivision.
Mr. Ziff owns both sites that this variance would affect. Wells
also mentioned that an approval was just received from the Planning
and Zoning Commission for a lot line adjustment. Wells further
showed the Board what type of topography surrounds the proposed
barn location. This area is surrounded by 30~ or greater slopes
and they are trying to minimize the impact on these slopes. Wells
stated that Mr. Ziff raises native plants, which he uses on his own
property. These plants are grown in the area of the proposed barn
tion, therefore, the proposed barn would be located near ,the,
loca
work activity to be used by this proposed barn. "'
Guy further clarified that Section 16-1.-3 st,
of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shad
.:. ,....
of property at the time of enactment o'f zon;
reason of exceptional topographic conditions <
or exceptional physical characteristics or ec
of property not created by the applicant subse
of these regulations, the strict ,applca
regulation would result in peculiar
difficulties to, or exceptional and unc
of such property, then the Board sha
appeal relating to said property; to aia1
strict 'application so as to relieve suc
provided such relief may be granted w
to the public good anc~ without substant
the intent and. purpose of the zoninc
policies and regulations of this Code
an exceptional topographical condition
:es, "Whereby reason
of a specific piece
g regulation, or by
other extraordinary
R ,~,>., ~, .,.~,,.
iition of such piece
uerit to the adoption
ion of any" zoning
o`eptional practical
ship upon, the owner
authority upon an
a variance from such
~ulties or hardship,
-bstantal detriment
_.
Ltering or impairing
ct regulations and
with 30$ sl'opes`:
Shaffran asked .,for public comment and there was none.
a 'coven asked Wells,,, if the Stanwood Homeowner's Association had
"., .. » ,. ,,ks ... . ~. ~,~: _:_ .,
Spp frail these plans. pocky C`happt, Starwooc~ p"ropr"ty"Ntahager
P _. ,
.. .. .
- s.: ,o... «.f .. .......~
reviewed the a lans tandd have ta' t Te H'omeowneY~s"'" ~ssociatiorr have
p pp owed the location of`t a barn
pending the appro4al of the `Board bf Adjustment.
After further discussion, Guy made a motion to grant a 45 foot
front yard setback variance for C"onstruction of a barn, from the
adjusted lot lines as shown in the plans submitted., due to extreme
topographical-hardship and unique conditions to the property not
caused,by the applicant, specfically,'tlie existence of a' road.
Mathis 'seconded the motion and all were in favor.
representing Chuck Mayer, to request a 20 foot west sideyard
setback variance where 30 feet" is re
gained` in the AF'-1` zone
mentioned that there rucfion of a residential garage. McCloud
are topographic constraints. McCloud briefed
the Board on'ths property. The proposed two-car garage is to be
a 22' by 22'.
A scenic overlay and` ridgeline review was approved for this
proposed garage by the Planning and Zoning Commission Ostwald
_.. .,
commented that a garage cannot be placed ariyiahere else `or "`this
property becaxse it is a very steep 'piece of property.'
i. a
Guy mentioned that the drawings are not true to scale and that a
21 foot west sideyard setback would be needed. Guy also asked if
Mayer's had an easement through the adjoining property for the
driveway and McCloud stated that they did.
Shaffran asked if there was any public comment and there was none.
After further discussion, Guy made a motion to grant a 21 foot west
sideyard setback variance, where 30 feet is required, for
construction of a garage, due to a nonconforming lot and a
topographic hardship. Ostwald seconded the motion and all were in
favor.
Raymond Pojman was present to request a 30 foot front yard setback
variance, where 100 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district,
for construction of a single-family residence.
Pojman stated that the lot is only 165 square feet, therefore,
believes this to be a nonconforming lot. Pojman also stated the
Architectural Review Committee at the Crystal River Country Estates
has signed off on his proposed plans. There is a hole already dug
on this property which Pojman wants to utilize for the foundation
of his proposed house.
Shaffran stated that the proposed house would be centered on the
lot. Shaffran asked for public comment and there was none.
Shaffran moved to grant a 30 foot front yard setback variance,
where 100 feet is required, for construction of a single-family
residence, due to nonconforming lot size. Ostwald seconded the
motion and all were in favor.
Art Pfister was present to request a 16 foot height variance, where
12 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, per the Pitkin
County Land Use Code, for construction of a barn.
Pfister mentioned that he has to relocate his ranching operations
due to the Pfister Ranch/Golf Course development. This is an
ongoing agricultural venture.
Shaffran asked for public comment and there was none.
Schaffner mentioned that in the Board of County Commissioners
meeting on Monday, July 1, the Board discussed changing the height
limitations for barns on conforming size lots in the AF-1 and RS
zone districts to 28 feet. This may be incorporated in the new
Pitkin County Land Use Code.
4
. ~. ~'"°"
Shaffra 'g suction
of a barnnoas per the plans6submi ted,hdueatoadownzoning StOstwald
seconded the motion and all 'were in favor.
.. .~..... .+.~i ...tea.-. Yv..7, .,~.....~ ......... ........ .........~.... .. ..L.........,.....~..7
•e's to request a 10 foot front yard. setback variance,
feet is required in the '"f"-30 zone":district., fox
m of an addition to a single-family residence.
Brandt ,explained that the lot is a pie-shaped lot with steep slopes
around fhe house. Additional pictures were submitted 'to the file.
Brandt stated that the allowable'E`~R`,for'this lot is,_5,46~ square
_ ~..
feet; the finished Name wou18 bring tkie FA12""'tip to 4,035:" square
feet, well under the 5,468 square `feet.
Brandt submitted to the record tiSq`letters: one letter from Pat
Rymer, a neighbor, approvin this` "' "
g proposal; and a letter Yrom the
Red Mountain Ranch Homeowners Association approving the praposed
plans for the addition. _.
Neiey mentioned that the original house is already in the
setbacks. Schaffner stated that she researched as to why the
_...
~- ,- p N , "<,.
of lthislnonconformit ace Afterh a brief kdsand could find no records
y. _ scussion, it'was decided
". • ~n, ~~ . ,.
that if this ~ request is approved, tie""Boar"c`~" wiYY'~~`also'•`grant
approval for the existing nonconformity.
Shaffran asked for public comment and there was none.
Guy questioned other' options on this lot, but after further
additiopn, it was shown that there is no other place t`o put the
n.
Brandt also mentioned that a Minor Scenic Overlay Development
review was granted to the Alcitores from the Planning Office..
After further discussion, Neiley moved to grant a 20 foot front
yard setback variance where 30 feet is required, for construction
of ah addition to a single-family residence, and to grant approval
for the existing nonconforming single family resid"ence, based upon
the plans submitted, due to topographical hardships. Mathis
seconded the motion and all"were in favor.'
~ariance'for an existing storage shed; and a
_..
~etback"variance arid``a l0 foot rear yard
:onstruction'of an addition, in the SR zone"
aide yard
ance for
,request
5
,tea F'-h
for a 25 foot front yard setback variance, a l0 foot east side yard
setback variance, and a l0 foot rear yard setback variance for
construction of a proposed shed has been withdrawn per the
applicant.
The residents have just purchased the mobile home park. Guy asked
what the future plans were for the park. Guy Gervae, president of
the Homeowners Association, stated that they plan to go for a PUB
approval and change the zoning so that more permanent changes can
be made to the park. Gervae mentioned that the Homeowner's
Association reviewed Donze's plans and had no problem with what he
is requesting.
Schaffner mentioned that the zoning for that area is for lots of
15,000 square feet or greater. None of the lots located at Lazy
Glen fall within these guidelines, therefore, everything being
added not meeting the setbacks will have to be reviewed.
Shaffran stated that she would have no problem with the shed as it
is a better alternative to having equipment and items spread over
the property.
Shaffran asked for public comment and there was none.
For the first variance request, Guy moved to grant a 30 foot front
yard setback variance for an existing storage shed, where 30 feet
is required, due to nonconforming lot size. Shaffran seconded the
motion and four were in favor with Neiley abstaining.
The second request was discussed. Neiley stated that he had a
problem with this request since it would cause a zero lot line
along open space which should be available to the residents of the
park. Neiley believes that a homeowner should be able to access
the perimeter of their building on their property, not in open
space.
Donze mentioned that along the back lot line is an elevated berm
and is a totally unusable area. After further discussion it was..
realized that there would be approximately four feet from the
addition to the lot line.
After further discussion, Guy made a motion to grant a 7 foot west
side yard setback variance and a 7 foot rear yard setback variance,
due to nonconforming lot size, for construction of an addition, as
per the plans submitted. Shaffran seconded the motion with four
approvals and Neiley denying the request.
Mary Kenney was present to request a`"7 'foot side yard setback
variance in the SR zone district, for construction of a proposed
addition to a mobile home.
6
Kenney submitted letters into the record from adjacent property
owners approving this request. Also submitted were pictures
showing the need for the addition.
After a brief discussion, Guy moved to grant a 7 foot side yard
setback variance, on the condition 'that at-least 15 feet remain
between the addition and the adjoining trailer, due to
nonconforming lot size. Mathis seconded the motion and all were,
in favor.
The minutes of the June 4, 1991 meeting were approved as written.
John Ostwald tendered has resignation at the conclusion of this
meeting.. His letter is on file in the Zoning Department.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~_
Cindy L' Christensen, Secretary
Kand Shaffr Chairman
7
_~._w