HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.85.15
Dottie fox moved that the following be adopted:
BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
OF THE COUNTY OF PITKIN
STATE OF COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO.85-15
Peter Kelly, 25670 E. Highway 82
WHEREAS, the subject property is within the unincorporated area
of Pitkin County, Colorado; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to
grant or deny such varian~es by virtue of Title II, Section
16--1.3, Pitkin County code (Land lIse 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, in~luding 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 that the applicant's request for a
70' front yard setback variance for addition of airlock to
duplex
Additional conditions or restrictions:
WARNING:
Any violation of the terms of this resolution may
result in rehearing and possible revocation.
Bob Throm second the adoption of the foregoing Resolution. The
roll having been called, the vote was as follows:
Bill Mason -- yes
Paul Krausch - yes
Bob Throm - yes
Dottie Fox - yes
.Joe Zanin - Yf'S
The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of
the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado.
DATED:
The Board of Adjustment of
Pitkin County, Colorado
Attest:
Ll --u
_ [CJt,<~~ _lj~____
Secr'etary
n ~&_~~:_~_______
Chairman
... ~ " ,-" r....... 1.
t, ,j. "_,. J'\.~....
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
6-/1 (" 1995
APPLICANT ~~ k LC=-Y
OWNER PE?T-t< /"C=C [6 Y
LOCATION OF PROPERTY ~ ;;-61-6 E. lfw y
/fPFN, ~. g161!
,
DATE
CASE I
c9::r- 15
ADDRESS 15o.r I J? 52-
ADDRESS /k fJf5rJ, &(0 M{) 0
<f' .:L ' 8>/61 :L
Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made 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
jUstifiCati?~s I t./E S<::)L~ ) /hI< CocK II cs. T7 8t/kF (' bney J
r;, If. () U jJ OP,t Re=.r I () BcJ (' 8'_ I/o () /770'(1) 1ft-. 8'r S (jJ Fr.
hoo~llk61 /2+no. tI.J 117f fRo;C>~[-f) AOD} 770/J o. /1
, ~ ( Pc t.9ff ~ S"e:.s Cb,u<,( LIFT7t!Y()
~OSthf' 6.;cY< or (bNS&' C)t'f-770~
, f)4 C'dt!ft-
Applicant Signature~)
provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the B~ilding Inspector to
forward this application to the Board of ~iustmep~and reasp~ for not /
gran~tin ,a b~id~, ~rmit,:, :~ ~ 1.ift!ZO,-<<--,~ Lh~'=I:'..Clu,- r":.L24L-
, ,<vv t.htk ) 'D,' ," J~Z, hj ~'7l-+>'/.' C',~-"~7'YU"7V j,u'uJ., .&,,/ _l~" d,,';/
-- 'Lt.4/'. ~J ?L r. - v-u ;/ "'.-y --,
/) ...p) .I ,L ~, ii/,. ':~ :".., '{' J ;/<",od_-" 7-/..20
11/ /' r':c:7 7l--U',. ;7-/"-/ -Lri-:!A't.A;lA-~L.- f," v -T1-7~-" t ~.. ,.
f1.' (:, " +"''1
( , ~ _ ./ -ru' ~{.A""'<4'
'1'/, -1:2 .u-v.-~dM~ ~_.M.'..L.,,'7I-" ~~; , "I
.~ L.L---~' ./'LtL' -{) .~ j? r:l- / _ jd-<-~
, ! J ~'iti,L, ~ --:;ZL&~4.- r ,f'U-"~lj, .
~,~, A,{~ ';-.L.-<~~~' 71 ~"" #.+" ~' ~4
_..ov-d~~tiui7/r/i-( ,~~""~ --<U -.<e~1'1di~ffspector/4;" / '" ,'_
Date Permit rejected: 6- //, I~ Board decision (/
Application filed
Mailed
Date
Secretary Board of Adjustment
~<:7'V 7-/ /2---
I ). " l r) rl< "..,. r'J
'--...\}\.J .~~tJ'I...
.'
PETER F. KELLEY
Box 1832 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Telephone (303) 925-7776
June 10, 1985
Board of Adjustment
Pitkin County Colorado
Please find attached documents required by you for consideration of my
application for a variance to add a passive solar, air lock vestibule
to my residence Lot 11, Block 1, Filing I Mountain Valley Subdivision.
I propose to replace the existing 29.3 sq. ft. storage closet with 116.3 sq ft.
passive solar, air lock vestibule to provide energy conservation to both
units of my duplex. This would be an increase of 87 sq. ft. to the dwelling.
We would like to use large double glaze windows on the South exposure of
the vestibule. We would also use tile, combined with the existing con-
crete slab for maximum solar energy gain and retention of heat. We would
also use pre-hung metal, foam core exterior doors to minimize heat loss
from the building.
In my request for this variance, I claim the hardship of energy conser-
vation.
The existing total area of my house is now 1,914.3 sq.ft. The proposed
total would be 2,001.3 sq.ft. The size of my lot is 18,165 sq.ft. With
the proposed addtion, this would yield a floor/area ratio of .110
The building department has informed me the maximum floor/area ratio
acceptable for my lot is .16, so I would be well within the limit on
this figure.
It is my sincere hope that you will approve this variance.
Bes t rega rds ,
~
Peter F. Ke 11 ey
(; ~: ~~ ~~:~ 3
-
{lJ~
I~
, 11. /!~
\~ r05~
~) crlb/'>
'~
..'!1J~ f)
b;>! ~/i;;;l ~ ()!-3
~fj2"dG ) . .
I!~.c '
~6Y
/JAJJp~ j e~
~
~~
Cf,~"f
~ : "f .
-------
~
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
.~ \
'9 \
\
~ \
.~ \
'1,..\
r\
5 \
" \
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
':1/'.11:10 ':INIon.
,0:;'0'0\ ~..ori!
,~
~
~~~
~o
~\
'"
~
-
~
\
l
\
\
t \
~ \
~ \
.; \
- \
11 \
~ \
~ \
\
,
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
.\
\
\
\
\ '"
\ i
\ 3
\ 1;\
\ ~ ~
\ 1 1,
\~
"
." .
~\
"
-__--'.-.qo'av
~~~N
'%
,9
~~
d~
,;<<9 qJv
;,> ...J,
ri-O' _..II?
" -i"V.)--
. 4'G:-~
,~.
----(-~
---------
-
~l.'.'l ,~~
~~t""~p'IJ'
(lO;~:l"2:'tI~
t.\"W
\~~~~~~
'~.'r~t '1
1 ~~\~\ ~
~\ 'lF~ li\
~t,~t\1 ~ ,~
~.\iN1r ~ ' ~
~i~ ~~~ Il \-
~.tb 't~\$ \ .'\~
\\W~~$~ \ ::~
~"t.$~q~ .~~ <:t,\~
3 h~1 . ~
4~e~~\~ \ ~
,~,'\o~\~ ~ Ii
....,"t,~"f~~-..~
l:,~ t'\..,...... ..._l
-
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
1
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
---n
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
\ I
"~ \
\
I
\
\
'....-.....,-
~,
.........-----
..~
e;1-
/~..<
.<;f'V'
./
",P'
.CP
?~
-----
C1.
ill
l-
ii)
~ ~
o'
0'
. i
i. ij\ ~ \
~ Ult~
~"J ti 1
I:f r ,_ .l ~
<t j ,-- e \L
~fj\~
~pq:-
.,~d
. .l. ~
( ..'.
l!l~
"' " .-
Ul t
0.. "
'J
:J~
.l: {
t' )'
~ ~
~. 11
_'1.
~
III
>
/)',-" r'l ,.,,<" ,.~
'-J")' '\' ..... .~ ,,)
-
{'l""l.(~ ,.......
'-..........1.... .....
-
. .
. '
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PITKIN COUNTY
JUNE 25, 1985
Members Present:
Bill Mason, Chairman
Dottie Fox
Paul Krausch
Joe Zanin
Alte,'natoes:
Boo Throm
Peter Dobrovolny
Mason questioned if there were any comments or corrections to the
minutes from the April and May ~eetings. Fox moved tt) approve
the May 28, 1985, minutes. Paul Krausch moved to approve the
April minutes. Zanin second the May minutes and Dobrovolny
second toP April minutes. All were in favor.
Mason cluestioned if there were any c()mment~ before beginning with
the applications. Fox wanted to know the status of the log
structure at Boise Cascade on Highway 82. Newbury stated that
she was investigating the use of the material/structure. Fox
(IUesti()nerl if the str\lcture would eventually disappear. Newbury
stated that it would.
Aspen Quick Mart,
14222 Highway 82, requesting a sign
there representing the applicant at
held until the end of the meeting.
85-12
permit. There was no one
this time. The file would be
Stephen and Saundra Swanson 85-13.
0140 W. Sopris Creek, requesting a 15' front yard setback variance
for addition to residence. Stephen Swanson was there to repre-
sent self. He explained that the remodel was to correct some
severe architectural problem and to add room to the residence.
There is a deck on the second floor, north side, that leaks and
they wished to make that into a master bedroom. An 8 x 30 open
air porch will be placed on the east side of the house. This
creates the setback problem on the front yard. The existing
garage encroaches the front yard setback and the proposed porch
would not encroacb further than that garage.
Fox qupstioned if the property had been downzoned. Npwhury
stated that it had. There were no objections in the file. A
sign was posted.
(Mason took this time to question if all applicants had placed
signs on the property. They had)
It was determined that a 28' front yard setback variance would be
more appropriate for the porch addition. Zanin motioned to
approve a 30' front yard setback variance due to downzoning. Fc)x
second the motion. A vote was called for and all were in favor.
Art Smyth and Marty Griner 85-14
Lot 5. Block 4, Filing 2, Gateway to Snowmass SID, requesting a
77' front yard setback variance and a 30' sideyard setback
variance to construct new residence. Smyth and Griner were there
to represent selves. Dobrovolny wanted to see a subdivision plat
to see where the lot sits. Smyth had that information.
Dobrovolny stated that the site chosen by the applicants was the
only building site available. Smyth had a topographical map that
sbowed the sitp chosen was the most natural spot. There were no
objections in the file.
1
l
.. :-
Dobrovolny moved to grant a 77' front yard setback variance and a
30' sideyard setback variance due to topographical hardships.
Krausch second the motion. A vote was called for and all were in
favor.
Peter Kelly 85-15
25676 E. HighwAY 82, requesting a 70' front yard setback variance
for addition of airlock to duplex. Peter Kelly was there to
represent self. Kelly explained that presently a storage unit
between tIle front doors of the duplex extends 4.8' as shown on
the survey. The patio extends 7.6'. They propose to tear the
storage cabinet off the front, extend the full 7.6' to the end of
existing slab and enclose the entrancp doors of the llni1:s ancl
place an air'lark. The glass at the concrete structures have a
southern exposure and the owners could take advantage of the
solar availabilities.
Newbury explained that the request was within the 100' setback
from Highway 82 and it is a non--cc)nformitlg use, Wllich tradi-
tionally cnnnn1 be allowecl tn add on to. When it was originally
built the zoning allowed duplexes in that location. There is not
a prohlem wit}l the floor area ratio. The additiun would tIe for
both unit, the party wall would he continued into the airlock.
The total amount of addition would be 87'.
the request based upon energy conservation,
motton. A vote was CHI led for and all were
Fox moved to approve
Throm second the
in fRvor.
NewburY introdumed Spero Niarhos to the Board members present at
this meeting. He will be the new alternate.
Fox moved to table the Aspen,Quick Mart request until the next
meeting. Throm second the motion. Mason questioned if the sign
met code. Newbury stated that she had a problem with the
background. Also the sign is larger than what is allowed. Throm
questioned the status on the county sign code. Fox suggested a
memo to Tom Smith, County Attorney, reminding him of the sug-
gestions sent to him with regard to updating the present sign
cone,
The me~ting was adjourned,
Respectfully submitted,
~j~!J!~~~___
_&_2l.2~ ____
Chairman
2
Scanned 10/9/07
File Finders Box
#11