HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.77.27- -. _ F .:_m_;a4d: . ,rte _...<- .r.._ .. ._.
APPEAL TO BOARD OF ADJUST~fE~•T
County of Pitkin
Date May 23 lg y~
SEA eJss~ ~~- ZS
Case ~~
Applicant ~Tohn P McBride ' ' ' ' Address 105 Pacific Avenue Aspen
Owner McBride Construction & Mgt. 'Co. Address same
Location of Property Lot 3, Block 4 As en Air ort Bus
` iness Center
~. ,. ,.:... , s -.., (Attached}
Any pertinent data must accom a y this application, and will be made
a part of this Case \o. -1~ ~~ preliminary, surbep'; foundation
The Board may return this application if it does not contzin all the
facts ir. question. Applicant's description of proposed variance
showing justification:'
PLEASE SEE ATTACHED ~ '
_ !
Applicant Signature D~jC ~~,
Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the Building Inspector
to forward this applicator. to ±l:e Boaxd of Adjustment and
not gxanting a buildin reason for
^^ _ g permit : ~k', ~ ~.~~.,. c:tr~z_.c, ..C~~_,-4Ey/'~~'~` ~--r-- T
iti?'2l'e~. ~ ~ L' ~bn..!lYlGi+.Tii
G /
• ~~
Blcig.Insp.Signature--- ~--~-=7 /
Date permit rejected:'7~''~ Board ~j~
Decision
Application filed: ,~' ~,3 ~J - __ .,,
Date of FIearing: Date:
,. ..
Mailed
ary,
---:..-
May Z3, 1977
Applicant hereby requests a variance from the lot area requirement for multi-family
residences (i.e. 4,000 square feet per unit) fora 10-unit employee housing row
house. Reasons for the request are as follows:
1 . With the county's interest in preserving open space and at the same time
establishing reasonably priced housing, this particular regulation (and
only this one) is counter productive. Its°'existence will bring about a
sprinkling of not-so-cheap housing throughout the county and burn up
open space.
2. Present housing densities in the Airport Business Center meet all code
requirements except this one. They are approximately 2,000 square
feet per unit and not too dense. We have had no complaints whatsoever
from either e}nployees or renters. Also, our open spaces e"XCeed county
requirements ,
3. We were granted a variance last year from this same requirement for 32
units .
4. This year we were led to believe by the building department that if we
complied with PAR and the open space'requir~~ e~"" ~ t; tfia"t-the contradic- ~J
tory lot area requirement would be waived. Having concluded this in
early March, we proceeded with working drawings and. surveys.
5. If we are forced to comply with this requirement; our rents will, have to
increas
e $138.00 per unit. per month, a decided and unhecessary hard- ~~~uMa
ship on employees, if not adecisive'-destructive blow to this employee,, ,
housing project and all others made to comply.
w ~~'
Incidentally, this project is in full compliance with the zoning, wherein are
allowed one employee housing unit per business.. Presently there are 117 busi-
nesses in the Airport Business Center and 76 employee housing units.
~!~~n,.e,.~
4 :o- . o, v,
AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER • 105
i
..
• ~ ..
., .J- .... ..,, ~ _...
N .,.. . x .., `, _..~i,
R.~~3.
~_,: ~'
~~'
_'
May 23, 1977
Applicant hereby requests a variance from the lot area requirement for multi-family
residences (i.e. 4,000 square feet per unit) fora 10-unit employee housing row
house. Reasons for the request areas follows:
1. With the county's interest in preserving open space and at the same time
establishing reasonably priced housing, this particular regulation (and
only this one) is counter productive. Its existence will bring about a
sprinkling of not-so-cheap housing throughout the county and burn up
open space.
2. Present housing densities in the Airport Business Center meet all code
requirements except this one. They are approximately 2,000 square
feet per unit and not too dense. We have had no complaints whatsoever
from either employees or renters. Also, our open spaces exceed county
requirements .
3. We were granted a variance last year from this same requirement for 32
units .
4. This year we were led to believe by the building department that if we ~dc?"u%
complied with FAR and the open space requirement, that the contradic- ~~~t~Y
tory lot area requirement would be waived. Having concluded this in ~w `~~°1``~
early March, we proceeded with working drawings and surveys. ~, ~c
`~( ~ `tee `~0"~.
5. If we are forced to comply with this requirement, our rents will have to~ ~
increase. $138.00 per unit per month, a decided a'nd unnecessary hard- ~)e4 ~
ship on 'employees, if not a decisive destructive blow to this employee,~i
housing project and ali others made to comply. °
Incidentally, this project is in full compliance with the zoning, wherein we are
allowed one employee housing unit per business. Presently there are 117 busi- _
nesses in the Airport Business Center and 76 employee housing units.
~~
AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER
„-~r*„
,,
;ii . ~n~ rn~ n
F
.Y. r a .. ., ,I.
McBRIDE TOWNHOUSE VARIANCE
Existing Airport Business Center 2=bedroom apartment @$34'6.00 per month
equals $5.41 per square foot.
(. 36 FAR) proposed 2-bedroom Townhouse -- 720 square-feet @ $5.41 per square
foot equals $360.00 per month.
(with 4,000 square feet per unit) proposed 2-bedroom Townhouse -additional
$138.00 per month equals $498.00 per month.
This is an increase of 38 3%.
Computation of Additional Rent
Lot area required by .36 99, 200 square feet
Lot area required by minimum lot area;
8 units @ 3200 square feet 25,600 square feet
35 units @ 4,000 square feet 140,000 square feet
165,600 square feef
66, 400 sauare feet difference
Additional number of square feet required 66,400
multiplied by land cost (10% market value) x 25¢ per square foot
$16,600
divided by 10 units = 1, 660
divided by 12 months = $138.00 per month extra rent unit
;e'wa v,.. eve
tvo. 23978 j
County Treasurer's Office, Pi~kin'County, G~olo.
Asnen. Colo-- ~'~ '~ ih'~/J
TRF L; F: NOECKEI [0:, REMYER
.-_ ...._ ^.X.-j45 rcm.
1 : ~ . ~>. ~ ,, ~ , t.1 .~ ...,:: . i ~ .. :^ ~ ~ . » .. ~'
vv~r.ilrn
Junsdlctio
Applicant io cpmDlPtP mimhnrbd cn~rne nnG)
°., '' 2 1
072
~I
~ ~~~~ ~k u~ ~~~:
~oN .N~~~ :w
p
7o'lorado o
PI o
D
a .
lo3 wppR ESr .. _ „...... .. ~_, ........, ... ....
.. ...:,.... ...
...
..,. _.._.. x
u
Lot 4, 1#'lock 3, `FNir'"st 1 i~`°'"n`g" Asp'~n rport usiness
...
1 en
As
"
~~~'"~'~
... _ _ ..~ _ ,
=
LOT No ter,
pen, o
ora o
. eLR TRACr '
LEGAL
nE3CR ..•
'
"
. ^ ~
Y .. .....~ 1^3[E ATT YRED SRC ETI
'
rvr..--w ..
..
wrrb,.., .,. R .. _. s.. '
As en Air rt Busi ss
OWNER " .
.
MAIL CDbRE55 21P
2 ~ PHONE
~~ ..
John P. McBride ,T"0~`~'aci~ic Avenue As eTa ~^^y~ ~yy~y~tk ""~'""~'~°°'"'
:, wu.,>ss,
. p ~i~
~
.
l
CON TRA~C YOR ~
` l
tlLJ
MPIL AODfl E
$$ ~ PALNE
. LI L'CN5S NO
McBride ~onst t, 1 acif~C v '
~
ARCX TECY OR' E'$YGNeR' "MAIL gDDRE39 PNONL
Q ••-, " •
David T~ec~er
1`f"5'~9{`
e ~ xa.IISMya IO~SE~O
~`°:~`~`""`.~
~ "~ °°~{-€."r"`~'
,
a
t., envier; o o.
ENGiN EER .Tp
BI / O~' ~~
MAt L-A6DRE55 PNONE
'S N/A L'IOEN 3C ND
_ ..
LENDER ..~.
~.~.~
.~ ~. w°,.. <. .
" ..-,..
.. .
MAfI ADORC35 _
6
.. .
..
STANCH '
none .,
' .;:..
JsE oP eu rcDTN'c' ^
~
~
workshy -and residenc~:___ ... ~ _._ .. _._~ _ __w ._
~ .._ ... .. ,_ , ..~.,w:. _ .t,.::-
8 Class of Work: ®NEW ^gpDIYION~ ^ ALTEWATION '~T7 REPI~IR"~ ^ INO~E ~` """~ ~ I '"`~'" ~"~
._ G _ .. _ „,... ~ _.:~
.,
9 Desctibewurk:
Frame and Masdr[r~'_ ~ ~
,.
_.. "~_. - yx ti.
,. _ :.
_
;., .
~° _ - ' °- '-
.
,n
w ....
10 Change of u$e from ..: ._....r.... .._.
_ ,
f
~. '.
_. ... r..° .., .+anw ~ a c.. a gairyp dX x. , y° .. _....
... _. a
f., L.::
Change of use to _. ,. .......
11 Valuation ofwork.$ '266~dQ0:~0 "~~ ~~ ~~ _~~~~
,,. - ~ ~~ --. PLAN CHECK FEE
~ ~ PERMIT FEE
SPECIAL CONbYY16NS~:'. ..., 7TOn2..
... a. _
T
Pe of ,: ~
' ....... .°~'^, ..
v Occup39cY"
..
' ... .. ..... ..:... .~ . ~ ~: .; Const. Group'.
. Division
. .._... ~ .... "
:.,« .. ...:: , _. , • "~° i
f
" ~ ::.
.
. S
ze o
Elltlg. No. of Max.
;.. -'-' ,Y„ ~-- (Total)59~_Ft.., : .. . 5tor185 OCC. loaO
_.
APPLICATION 6CCEYTED BY "
'PLANS CHECKEtl'eV APPgOVE6 FOH'155UANCE QV. Fire
ZOnD Use
Zone Fire 5PrInk18r5
Regwretl ^Vas^No
No. o£ OFFSTREET'PA R1fING SPACES.
-_ ' ~, D'~melRng Un'itf" ~~ Covered
UnCOVeYetl
NOTICE ~
SEPARATE~PERMITS"'IAtiE'`1i~°I~Y
~`~b~Fi"
~~`~ ~ "~~~ ~ ~ Special Approvals Requdrei!' _
Received" Nof. R'equireil
f
E
.LNG, HEATING ~~I~`t'11LA7'I°ICfCi`T~R'AP'FS"Cb?5'p1YTl~f~~YVG""` r ZONING
'-
~
'
THIS PE RMIT~B'ECO`MU'S IV~YJL L'"Y\` ~~~}
'"~ HEALTH DEPT -
-
C
TION AUTHOF1fZED I~"N`OT""Cb ~ItIC~i.S"~`V(Yftl1~'"6p"~i1'3`; ~5'{S f~"` Fi:RE DEFY" " ~ .
.
CONSTRUCY1"(YfV"`b R"~S'O~K'`I$ "lJ'7TF~'""q`g','~h7~G'Y5"E"'[{°Kb'A ":4°
°
`
...` ~~ .
PERIOD OK
"i2U' U,>~'S"' /'j' A1G~*`"'T`~N71Lc"' 7.("~ORI~'""T§ CbM"°
M
N
E
... SOIL RERO
RY
~
C
D
... ..~.n, .-.„.„ QTHEIY"(SPectt'y)
I HEREBY C'ERYYFV'"t"N'h"'T I~'~~ °
APPLICATYON AND KNOW YME SAME TO BE TRUE AN CORRECT
LL PROVISYONS OF LAWS ANb'
~
OR DINANCES GOVERNING THIS
TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER 5FrEC YFIED,
HEREIN "OR NOT
THE' GRANTI
'
R
,
NG OF A PERMIT DOES NOT
ESUME TO GIVE AU'THORITV 70 VIO
AT
O '
L
E
R CANCEL THE
PROVISIONS OF'ANY OTHER ST
~.._
ATE OR LOCA LAW REGULATING
CONSTRUC ION OR TH PE
°
RMANCE F CONSTRUCTI .-
'
.l
a
.
.
,
: .
...,
~
`GNdT EOi C6N TgpC TORO AV THOR2Ep AOENT _~pp I
_. .. .. _.
...
,.,..... aw.
SI6Nq TV RE OF OWNER li OWNER RV ILOER) pwTE)
L_'..> .}
.
....
' W4CM bb'nbcei'G^CFYY[SN~WCWx+M4tp. .way -ac-:+enwrom.. y,,. .w-.~.~.... .. .. .
.....,.-CK. ~ :. M.O.
Form 100.1
.. .
rr~~r-v~cl~ar~~N- ~K:
~,a;m,;
P
I
T
K
I
N
C
0
pU
J.Y
T
~. <.
~, ,~.=.
506 E. MAIN STREET ~~ ASPEN, COLORADO SY61~ ~~~
July 2®, 1977
Mr. John McBride
Airport Business Center
lO5 Pacific Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear John:
The Commissioners have reviewed your pending
questions with respect to the proposed development'on
Lot 4. The concensus of opinion is that your contentions
with respect to the nonapplicablity of the minimum lot
requirements to both the existing and proposed structures
reconsiderationkof~theospecificfrequireme` to, initiate a '
nts of the code
with respect to your zone district, they would invite
you. to discuss relevant code changes with the P&Z for
ultimate consideration by the Board. Please contact the
planning office for P&Z agenda time.
Very truly yours,
~~
Sanc3r3 bi. Stuller
County Attorney
SMS/gg
cc; Bill Kane
.,.,>~,
~': s-v y,; ~a
_k
L
£- `.~.,A.-3 `~f 1. '.~L~ ~?N,L~..,~`a n1,E,r~. ! .`,'s.i,~kCt; ~{~..2':
M E f+l O R A N D U M
-..
T0: Pitkin County Board of Adjustment
FROM: Planning Office, Karen Smith
RE: Variance Request for Aspen Airport Business Center
DATE: June 10, 1977
The Planning Office has reviewed the Aspen Airport Business Center request
for a variance from the lot area requirement for multi-family residences.
We recommend denial of this request and have the following comments:
Contrary to the applicant's arguments made in this instance and in a
similar request for variance made this past year, the Land Use Code bulk
requirements regarding minimum lot area per dwelling unit, minimum 'u sable
open space per dwelling unit; and floor area ratios for uses other than
multi-family are not contradictory. In fact, each serves a very distinct
purpose. The floor area ratio of .36 is a density control mechanism for
commercial properties as the minimum lot area per dwelling unit is for
residential uses.
Minimum usable open space is a less restrictive provision which ensures
a certain amount of space which can be used by residents for active
recreation or passive lawn area. Such space shall be unobstructed by
structures or parking and unencumbered by such environmental constraints
as steep slopes.
It is unfortunate that the confusion over these separate Code provisions,
which enabled Mr, McBride to receive a variance a year ago February, was
never corrected. The lot size provision is not inconsistent with other
requirements such as F.A.R. and open space. They are not a misprint as
is suggested by the minutes of this Board's February 24, 1976 :meeting.
The Planning Office opposes the variance applied for on the grounds that
the result df approval will not only be contrary to the Code, but also will
be far too dense housing, density in fact which would be higher than that
of the Silver king Apartments. The effects of high density may hot be
apparent to ,existing residents simply because a large open space now
exists between housing and commercial areas. This proposal appears to
be designed to cluster housing density on a corner of the Tot, keeping
the remainder for future commercial development.
~, ,, ,~, rt ,, r-,r
t X4.,4~::.s ~'
b:4 - _ ,'lp N>v 4' 6, ~~.ux a.rF ro 2 ^6.4:9: ¢+A wl
- ...... . . ~. ..x1bv
.: -, q~m.w~,nw,~ +rsn~eu ,
~.
..
N _ Y:, ~ i
May 23, 1977
Being a potential renter of the McBride Tov~.~nhouses I strongly urge the building
department to grant the variance being requested.
I presently live in the existing rental units and find that density of building to
open space to be very comfortable. If more open space is required, the cost
per unit becomes so high the concept of employee or low cost housing is really
defeated.
Please take the above into consideration when making your decision.
Sincerely,
David Finholm
,.y,~~,~
~... t1'6::i.' ~.~ '.
,~ r
'OT''' `' ~ '"' I I ~
iv ~~~ p f (irs,_ C NE!SR AG
'ELrOR F. 1'IiE PTTKIV !'OU1TY GOARD Vi ~DJUSTN;Ef'iT
TO AL.L rRui'cRTI' Ot'¢!IFRS ArhC;TEi' };`i ~Ci-{r P[~UES(EU ZOIdTPtG Ur--^,iZIA~Cc DESC3iBED r?tLp'v!:
Rurs!aan? to P'iti;in Co:~nty Toning Rt'soTuiion, ~a i~ubliG Hea!°'il}g will kko
geld in ,° •`
the CO Un ty ~Gri,in}SSI DnO C,.S Ro.Dr}, P11.. ~:'in COUn'C,„ ~n U'.'~ r0l1$2s 1iS pen ,, C01 Ora d()s
(6r at euc:h other p"lace as the i,!eetinq «!ay then he adjourned) t:o coraider an
ap;,lic,Lin filE'd,.^.:ith the said"4,oard'Df Adj~as~,n2rt requesti»g authGr'ity fo>~
variance f'ro!?; tYte'p'rovisicns of tPie Cou!?ty Zoning R2solutior..
A7 i (}Er30n> a f footed by tl";@ prGiX?52~ 4'dr"f aric2 arE 1?}'t!}.$2d t0 app2dY'
a!?d ;to*.2 ti3.E?lY Vlc;:'i%S; pt'o t25 T.S nr Gb~CCtl vv^175.. if yGU Ccii1ri0t d!~N2.31'(32rSOndily
at SuC'I m%c t'In j, t,';r2!1 YGJ arO JI"ned t0' StatO yCUY' V12w5 OV 18t i,e~i' pa Y"'~1GUl%1"I,Y
}f VDU I1,L'G Ob~P,GiTGn t0 SUCh V~+'r}d;lC2, d5 tY12 BGdrd Gr AdjirS tr^E?!'i is l~'?Tl 9iV2
S0 r'Ol;ti C'01?Sid2ra tl On tD t-i}e OC1n1GY15 O` SUrrCUn G!Trrg prGp2rt} O in[t°Y'S 8rd Othe Y'S
df'"F:Ctc~d !n (icCid7',`}``, Vdi}2t(12r to grant or deity the reQui.st for var-Idnc~.
D~tc ai?'} Gl m2. 0'F Vie.°..:tl nu_. ~}U~Y._1.5, 1977, dt J: IJ O rcI OC':~.~i.
1. Doug °oyles:
Lct 53, Holland Hills - Sid2yard
Setback Variance.
2. Destination RGSOri; Corporation;
3. ~Ghn P~?cBride:
Let 34, l~Joodrun I - R2aryard s2tSack
Varian<;2.
Airport Business Center - P,pplicant
reguests a variance from the lot area
requirement for rr~lti-family residences
fora 10-unit e'njn?cyee housing roiv house.
A copy cf ul7 plats .are Gn fiTe in the Office of t;h2 Buildin; Inspec.i:Gr
qnd may bE examined during regular,business ho~:rs.
THc, PITYi.N C~~IINTY 3T.i?D OF AG~USTP9F'1T
Bill t~ason, Chairmai?
To be pubi isfaed 'in ti.e As»~n Tin,es Jul}e 3C, 7977.
....
fi rte;-
.NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAR"ING
BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT "" ^"
TO ALL PROPERTY 'OWNERS AFFECTEtl ~Y THEREQUESTEDZON^ING GARI~INCE~D~~S~CRI~~ED BE~LOW:`~
Pursuant to Pitkin County Zoning Resolution, a'Public Hearing will be
held in the County Commissioners Room, Pitkin County Court House, Aspen, Colorado,
(or at such other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an
application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for
variance from the provisions of the County Zoning Resolution.
All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear
and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally
at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter particularly
if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give
serious consideration to the opinions of ~urrounding property owners and others
affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance.
SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Date and time of Meetin :
John P. McBride:
June 7, 1977, at 5:15 o'clock P.M.
Airport Business Center - Applicant
requests a variance from the lot
area requirement for multi-family
residences fora 10-unit employee
housing row house.
and may beAexam~ned duringaregularobusinessnhouesOffice of the Building Inspector
To be published in the Aspen Times May 26, 1977.
THE PITKIN COUNTY., BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Bill Mason, Chairman
~..... _ :.~.:. ~. ' r 'a ~... <~ a x,.:" 9ra.A .... a5„. ^ . ^v.°~"tx:.:. s W,a~F,x !r~ rs § ~ , ~,$,