HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.82.36.A
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
County of Pitkin
Date
October 15 19~
Case #
82-36
Applicant Steve Richards
Address
- 9..."3
0296 S. Bill Creek Rd. ?('-,9,1
Carbondale
Owner
Same
Address
Location of Property
0296 S. Bill Creek Rd., Carbondale
(Attached! _
Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made a part of
this Case No.
The Board may return this application if it does not contain all the facts in
question. Applicant's description of proposed variance showing justification:
I need a 45' variance from the 100' front yard setback to construct
a horse barn. The total width of my lot is only an average of
115' and I need 40' back set on the back side to stay below the
ditch bank of the Big Four Ditch.
\..,
Applicant Signatur
Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the Building Inspector to forward
this application to the Board of Adjustment and reason ~or not gr~
building per'm1t: ~~ ,<J;:-~ ~ ..;;)c ~~.,M- (J ~
fi;j;:: ~'
Date permit rejected: :::~:i::c::::~ Signatu~~~
Application filed:
Date:
Mailed:
Secretary, Board of Adjustment
C~.~~ '---"""1
"4 \~ ._ .~
.
IlAJ-/AoJ.!'j /-, ~lI-erN/t
'EE>X 696
0J-rh 'tJAJc/ It-/e / a - ~( 6:2 3
I D~ uJ I}-fs ;(
3/IB 4-5t<~
lC-thhf5JC,k..') -jex/ts 79"'7"/9
])e#A//5 C!i/f1V
O:J- 6:2-. S- 1;5; K CL Rei.
arhfJAfd.4/€- J (1. 61 b'ls
Kbber-I ~we-f(
st/!}-r if ts ~ ! 3
0J.;.6f>1tt":/4(e) G. 'B( 6 ~3
C ' ~ r", ".. ...-'" F')
~.# \.-" ___ ..;1 A.,
-'-'~~ ~',:~y.. .~...'.
;'
",
.7":'"';.'fo';'''''~'_'''"~~''":",,,>,_..,.,
",
(;)s
d)v
c..-----
bdf5u
;))/J
~()
I d)
)(
'~"..",~~,,,,-,.,.
/
\
\~
Q
9'
~
~\--~- '\' /,.-:.-'"
, \/
\ .
l/
, L-~-~/
r--~
I ~'
I ~:2 i
j)"" t--_
- ~- ' ,
n-:- frj-, ~~ - ,- \
'1 ,'-"1'''--' \
s: i 't<'f?-< ')
~ 1:-'
'1l '-'--'- '>'.
r
~ ~ ]
(Xt. /
'(:.' {I
(j\
~~ z:
L--.J L
,~ (-
So-- V1 if \
r\(~-..... ~\,~,
__ .. _ _ 0' ' 0 Ie) "
--';1 -r;---- , ' \j~ .~\~ \
~' \J1 r.- -;:'( '.' "'....,,' -1-i1
__ ,~ I) '. v"y If":"
\! ~_~\J
:;f-i~. . ~o )
~ ~ '
r- ,r- \~ '
If O.
7>
..,
~
i
-J
r' t:.Pf:"'CJ!/57"f
VJ 1.5.5. ~:.::.
,v
<.." "
,i t
\ i v: r~
-\ ,: ;;i.;,:
(f ih
\) lI' '.
'- '- J'.
- -+.(.
\'--
_\0
Glt).
l";\~
. , ...
7,,\~
'.
\
\/-
" ---,--. ^ ' ^
. ,'. "--~ ,~__~_/~.~
I
(X)~ I
.L->o. I
()" .
Ul (1,' :
, C1\' /'
~
\)
\
(J~
G\ Q ,
C)'\ ().
'..0 ...t:: \
(J'., \
. 0'
..f::,
~
\i\
. \
\
\
,...,..-:, \ /'5)r
-\11 ' ,?, "'; ::;;>
t r l-V'I .,-'
"^ I ,,:. i
/- \ 'I
\Jj \')
\.. - ~'
-\) '-
.,..
~(~
s: . ),
"\ -,
'()~
"
,\"
C,.",,,r
" ,""'\3
... \.-:/ '~
- ....1
~.
r~ ',~
.. r,,, " r'\ 1"\
'" 'IV U lJfl.J
"
\
"
\
,_.....
---...:s::
~
....
~~
'- \.,
----( :5
i~
~li:
~
'--\-
-< ~
(J~'
\
\
.)
.
,
.
\~
\ (j,
, "-0
\ 0-
t> \J)
" g \Q
'V'J
) .
i
; "
,.2
! '
! ~ "
\ V) V1
" ()
.. ......
/i;j
\l
w
~
~n
..5 L---;
<::
...
'i
,~ r-'-
___ -.J ' ~
;v ~ \~
,,-, 'g-:t \ ~
0.. 9""l I ~
, G G.... ~O
" \;t.-l ~ ~~
~~-'-'-_._._----
_ -c:
~, ~
;--<:: I\/)
\n r--'~
:c;D i-I -->
~ '.~'r
r--
! ,
I ~ ~
\ ctpJ-, ~
\~,.../ J.v t
'---- '-! o,h I ~ ':-
__ ~ -...0-
-LA!)
\~
"
..
.....0'
~~
l{) ,
(J
?(()'
1'\1
o
'~
-
~ l{)
{'IT
" -
\:l"ri'l
aO
Ga-
~
t6
o
~\
\
0\\
~0
\li
"'),
N ,t'i
'iCJ\ J)
~ -
(j0'-
(i'ri'
~
~lq-
/
I
,Z-h .r;~1
J,.L~,goo88 /'
\~
..
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
,r)RM ',Q C. F Ih~t I<r! A, II. Ii I VI.
. "-. ---, -~"--
--- ---
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
October 27, 1982
Members Present:
Clark Smyth - Acting Chairman
Joe Zanin
Alternates:
Bill Lukes
Kandi Shaffran
Evan Gull
The meeting was to be held on October 26, 1982, at which time there
was not a quorum. It was decided by the three members present,
Clark Smyth, Evan Gull and Bill Lukes that the meeting be post-
poned until October 27, 1982, at 4:15 p.m., to be held in the
Building Department Office. There were no persons there to object
the applicants' request at that time.
Smyth questioned if there were any changes or corrections for
the minutes from the last meeting. Lukes moved to approve the
minutes. Shaffran second the motion. All in favor.
Steve Richards, Lot 113, Jehovah Flats, 82-36
requesting a 25' sideyard setback variance and a 38' front yard
setback variance to construct a barn. Richards was there to re-
present self. He presented a map to the Board showing the out-
buildings already there. He stated that he would be tearing down
the present sheds and combining them into one horse barn. He stated
that his lot was not wide enough to comply with the 100' front yard
setback. This is an RS-30 lot. Lukes questioned why Richards could
not build within the sideyard setback. Richards stated that it
was 30' on the side and rear. Richards also stated that there was
a big ditch with a steep dropoff. Richards pointed out that he
would tear down the pole barn, tool shed, tack shed and chick coop.
The wood shed would be torn down at a later date. Richards stated
that his lot is a little less than an acre. It is zoned for a 3
acre lot, which would make a 50' setback for the rear and sides.
Meeting these setbacks would push Richards closer to the front and
the house. Gull felt that this property would fit better into a
R-30 zone. There were no objections on file. Shaffran moved to
grant the request due to downzoning. The motion was for a 45'
front yard setback variance, a 20' sideyard setback variance and
a 10' rearyard vari~nce And as proposed the other three sheds and
barn will be removed. Gull second the motion. All in favo~.
Nancy Lovendahl, 25675 E. Highway 82 82-35
requesting a 7' height variance for an upstairs addition on cinder
block shed. Lovendahl was there to represent self. Lovendahl
explained where the shed was positioned on the property. She stated
that the shed was damaged and she wanted to rebuild it so it could
handle more ptorage and work space. She is a ceramic scupltor and
needs the work, space. She explained that there was three berms
around the shed that comes almost to the roof of the building.
If she builds toward the river she will be within the flood plain
and if she builds toward the road she will be encroaching the front-
yard setback. Shaffran questioned how high the structul'e would be.
N<<!
89
.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FOAM'~ C. F. unr<:Kn ft. R. It l. Ct'),
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 1982
Lovendahl answered that the shed would not exceed the height of
the main house. Christine Sparovic is the owner, leasing the
shed to Lovendahl. Lovendahl had a signed statement from the
owner to the Board showing that the owner was aware of what Lovendahl
is doing and giving her permission. Smyth questioned if this
situation needed to go through Growth Management. Lovendahl stated
that the space was not commercial because her office was in her
home and this is just a work area. Drueding advised that the
fact that it is rented out it would probably be considered commercial
use. Lovendahl stated that the owner would be using the space
for storage as well as Lovendahl. Drueding suggested that the issue
be tabled until it was determined if it was a legal use or not.
Smyth suggested that the Board rule on it with the condition that
it is a legal use.
Shaffran stated that she was against the idea of granting a variance
for someone to rent for commercial use. Lovendahl pointed out that
this was not her main income and the owner would be storing in
this space. And if Lovendahl left, the owner would probably not
rent it out again, and would continue to use the space for storage
purposes. Smyth questioned if she could add-on in the back.
Lovendahl explained that there was a berm in back and also she had
been told by the building department that it would bring it too
close to the flood plain. Shaffran questioned about the visual
impact. Lovendahl explained that it could not be seen from the
road except when driving a certain direction and then only at a
curve; the house basically covering the structure. Smyth had a
problem with it and felt it could be added on to in the back.
Lovendahl pointed out the berms around the shed and said it
would create extensive earthmoving. Gull felt that not granting
the variance would not be denying the use of the property and felt
that with no hardship on the property they could not grant the
variance. Smyth felt the shed was well within the setbacks and an
addition anywhere around it would not need a variance. Lovendahl
again pointed out the three berms with the concrete patio in the
front. Smyth felt it was possible to build into the berms.
Lovendahl pointed out that it would create a good deal of earth-
moving. Gull stated that even though it would be inconvenient,
it would not be denying the property of a use. Lovendahl stated
that if she expanded toward the front she would have to stay at
least 10' front the main residence and she questioned if a variance
would be granted if the owner needed more space than the addition
would allow. Gull's opinion was no because that would be the normal
constraint of a lot size. Lukes felt that there were areas where
the owner could expand. Lovendahl mentioned to the Board that the
structure is framed and questioned if they wanted to come see it.
Shaffran felt that would not make a difference. Drueding informed
the Board that the use is considered an illegal use. Shaffran moved
to deny the request because there is still reasonable use of the land.
Gull second the motion. All in favor.
Meeting was adjourned.
,
Respectfully submitted,
~.rL(o.LA f'~;). /'rnt'J^-.
ch
ka~tCM1-
Nt!
90
-
Scanned 7/26/07
File Finders Box
#10