HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.1001E-Hyman.011-96
- ,
CITY OF ASPEN
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPUCATION
DATE J,;t- lot'" 192i{
APPUCANT MAil\< < Ci111.1 j(/I'J IItCHf
MAlLlNG ADDRESS 100 1 EM. Uy H I1N
OWNER MA-I(J(" CI-fIL/fn,J IItL>tG
CASE #
PHONE
920'25-33
4 ffr;rJ
PHONE 9202.~33
MAlLlNG ADDRESS <; "IK (
LOCATIONOFPROPERTY /OD I E. ;-1'jI/I'fA! 6LvdL 5'1 L~r r-t-
(Streer, Block Number and Lot Number)
WILL YOU BE REPRESENTED BY COUNCil..':' YES_ NO~ '
Below, describe clearly the proposed variance. including all dimensions and justific:ltion for the
variance, (Additional paper may be used if necessary.) The building permit applic:lrion :lnd any
other information you feel.is pertinent should accompany this application. and will be made part of
this case.
<S l'OE. ,At TTA-CI\{O f'1t-~f.
fVon;: A~ ~'1E~ \~ \It\: ,wtl1mcr f1xz- 11lf- f'J!cJHT 1If.:J() WILL-
11-I<.i'(I..~'-"'Nf" MI'I-\<.. t- atItlS{tiv T\~ljc"'r 11t<S p~s
Applicant's Signarure ~~ ~
/
REASONS FOR DENIAL OF Bli1LDING PERIYllT, BASED ON THE ASPEN CITY
CODE, CHAPTER 24. AJ.'1 OPINION CONCERNING TIDS V ARlANCE Wll..L BE
PRESENTED TO THE BOARD BY THE ZONING DEPARTME~jT STAFF.
1),~5~,' ffffl.MINI!.'f~-") 11,/,,' CJ((~,,_~ ' ~o-:cp,J>or""'/1t
1!fJ .-rcc;:.d~~ --h ''1-/zI,,,;/l~ C -?Lt (>71}.}:~'!fs"- u.x /
, ~01+r!-{cf)f. -flue CL1;1h'>^J e-!,f Ill, "'a,oU- 161J-&;,~liqAl', ~.~
'J" d ' J "/'7 '/1"'-' ('auetl-&v Tfn /IUW
c7 ~. /.f?JvJt rPCJ = U I .X::)J. ~j! V'-'<;/'- v T ,c/ ".x .-
/tC},J,~ fo'fhy,f /IU 'frf}-;' /A;..cr VcU/Orl (.9. _, ~
DAtEPERMITDEt~DfO q "1/ OFFlClAL~{g. IVJ/7lL[J
DATE OF APPUCATION iO!V./ 10 HEARING DATE IO/Jell "if;.
CITY OF ASPEN
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPUCATION
DATE J,;.t- lot'" 192<r
APPUCANT MAil\( < Ci1l1.lfflN Iltc-Iff
MAlLlNG ADDRESS 100 1 EMf Uy H I1N
OWNER MA-I(I(' (/-flLlin,J 11tC->tG
MAlLlNG ADDRESS <; "IK (
CASE #
PHONE
920'25'33
4 '-fr; rJ
PHONE 9 20 2.~ 33
LOCATIONOFPROPERTY /OD I E. ;-1'j1l1",A! 6LvdL 5'1 v/ r-t-
(Streer, Block Number and Lot Number)
WILL YOU BE REPRESENTED BY COUNCIL':' YES_ NO~
Below, describe clearly the proposed variance, including all dimensions and justific:ltion for the
variance. (Additional paper may be used if necessary,) The building permit application and any
other information you feel.is pertinent should accompany this application, and will be made part of
this case.
<S l'OE. ATl'A-C$.O f'~f.
fVon;: A~ ~'1E~ I~ 1lfE M-&tl1~C\ fi:lrz- 11lf- f'Fc~'; 1If.:J() WILL-
11-1<.i'1l1t~ MN-k.- t QW..1'il{ltV ~~r -jlt<S ~S
Applicant's Signarure GJb ~
/
REASONS FOR DENIAL OF BUILDING PE&'YIIT, BASED ON THE ASPEN CITY
CODE, CHAPTER 24. AJ.'1 OPINION CONCERNING TmS V AlUANCE Wll..L BE
PRESENTED TO THE BOARD BY THE ZONING DEPARThIE~l STAFF.
DATE PERMIT DENIED
OFFICIAL
DATE OF APPUCATION
HEARING DATE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CASE #96-11
Before the City of Aspen Board of Adjustment
TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR USE VARIANCE
DESCRIBED BELOW:
Pursuant to the Official Code of Aspen of June 25, 1962, as amended, a public hearing will be held in the
BASEMENT MEETING ROOM, City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, (or at such other place as the meeting may
be then adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority
for variance from the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 26, Official Code of Aspen. 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, 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
vanance.
Particulars of the hearing and requested variance are as follows:
Date and Time of Meeting:
Date: October 24, 1996, City Council Meeting Room
Time: 4:00 P.M.
Owner for Variance:
Applicant for Variance:
Name: Mark and Christin Tache
Mark and Christin Tache
(represented by Al Beyer)
Address: 1001 East Hyman, Aspen Co 81611
Location or description of property:
1001 East Hyman, Aspen Co 81611
Block 34, Lot A, City of Aspen
Variances Requested: Applicant is requesting four (4): 1.) a 2.2 foot setback variance for a
new structure on Cleveland Street which would continue an existing non-conformance. 2.) a 6.7 foot
variance (0 foot setback) on Cleveland for a covered porch. 3.) a 10 foot variance for excavation on
the Hyman Avenue side to provide courtyard entrance to a garden level ADU, which may be up to 5
feet below grade. 4.) a parking requirement variance of to allow the second of the required two off-
site parking spaces be filled by an existing gravel parking space in front of the garage off Cleveland.
Will applicant be represented by Counsel: YES: NO: X
The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Charles Paterson, Chairman
MEMORANDUM
THRU:
Board of Adjustment ; ,
"L
L.--
Stan Clauson, Community Development Director J
TO:
FROM:
Sara Thomas, Zoning Officer
RE:
Michael Johns, 714 S. Galena Street
DATE:
October 15, 1996
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The applicant requests a variance from the side yard setback
dimensional requirement in order to provide a covered entryway and to enclose
the trash storage area in order to secure the area from bears, The property is
located in the LITR zone, which has a required side yard setback of five({~ feet
This project was started without a building permit in October, 1991 and a red tag
was issued at that time, No work has taken place since 1991. The current
building permit, #6-614, was applied for in June, 1996, but has been rejected
due to proposed construction within the required side yard setback. The
proposed construction would be built to the property line, requiring a variance of
five (5) feet, to allow for a zero (0) foot setback,
Please refer to the attached drawings and written information provided by the
applicant for a complete presentation of the proposed variance.
APPLICANT:
Michael Johns, represented by Robert Fritsch
LOCATION:
714 S, Galena Street
REVIEW STANDARDS AND STAFF EVALUATION: Pursuant to Section
26,108.040 of the Municipal Code, in order to authorize a variance from the
dimensional requirements of Title 26, the board of adjustment shall make a
finding that the following three (3) circumstances exist:
1. Standard: The grant of the variance will be generally consistent with the
purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan and this title.
Response: Although the Aspen Municipal Land Use Code does
require that trash storage areas be enclosed, the Code does not
allow for these structures to be within required setbacks.
2. Standard: The grant of the variance is the minimum variance that will
make possible the reasonable use of the parcel, building, or structure,
Response: The proposed location for the trash enclosure is in an
area on the property which would not conflict with the L-TR zone
districts' open space requirement of 25%. However, the proposed
location places the trash containers in direct proximity to the
buildings' front entrance, allowing for increased contact between the
buildings' residents and bears. Although allowing space for trash
storage should have been addressed at the time the building was
designed, there is now an issue of health and safety based on the
potential conflict between bears and people. Enclosing the trash
storage area is a viable solution to the health and safety issue, but
would require a five foot side yard setback variance of 5 feet.
Covering the entryway could be accomplished without a variance if
the roof structure did not project into the setback by more th~n 18".
,.j
3. Standard: Literal interpretation and enforcement of the terms and
provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly
enjoyed by other parcels in the same zone district, and would cause the
applicant unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty, In determining
whether an applicant's right would be deprived, the board shall consider
whether either of the following conditions apply:
a. There are special conditions and circumstances which are unique to
the parcel, building or structure, which are not applicable to other parcels,
structures or buildings in the same zone district and which do not result
from the actions of the applicant; or
b. Granting the variance will not confer upon the applicant any special
privilege denied by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan the terms of this
title to other parcels, buildings or structures, in the same zone district
Response: The special conditions unique to the parcel, i.e. the
proximity to the local bear population, the northern exposure and
shadowed front entry, should have been taken into account when
the building was initially designed. The lack of adequate space for
trash storage, and an exposed entryway should therefore be
considered as "mail made" hardships. However, the health and
safety issues ~.Nhich have occurred due to the unenclosed trash
storage area appear to be of great significance and should be
remedied.
As stated above, the applicants desire to cover the entry way can
still be accomplished if designed so that it does not project more
than 18" into the required setback.
ALTERNATIVES: The Board of Adjustment may consider any of the following
alternatives:
. Approve the variance as requested.
Approve the variance with conditions,
. Table action to request further information be provided by the applicant or
interested parties.
. Deny the variance finding that the review standards are not met. fJ
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the side yard setback
variance request for the entryway cover. Staff recommends approval of the
side yard setback variance request to allow for enclosing the trash storage
area.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to deny the request for a five foot side yard
setback variance to allow for a covered entryway at 714 S. Galena Street, finding
that the review standards are not met. I move to approve the request for a five
foot side yard setback variance at 714 S. Galena Street for construction of a
trash storage enclosure, finding that the review standards are met."
We are requestir' ,
1) a 2,2 foot setback variance on Cleveland Street for a new structure that
would continue an existing nonconformance. VVewould like to maintain tile existing
encroachment of tile current structure when replaced by a new structure,
2) a 6,7 foot variance (or zero foot setback) on Cleveland street for a covered
porCll, The variance would help us meet a stated AACP goal encouraging front
porches,
3) a 10 foot variance for excavation on the Hyman Avenue side to provide
courtyard entrance to a garden-level ADU, which may be up to 5 feet below grade.
Excavation within the setback will allow more light and better aCCf ss to the ADU, as
per Housing Autllority guidelines,
4) a parking requirement variance to allow tile second of tile required two off-
site parking spaces be filled by an existing gravel parking space in front of tile garage
off Cleveland street. Half of tllis current parking space straddles our property line and
tile city easement.
Summary of Request:
We would like to replace an existing dwelling witll a new small single-family
dwelling to house long-time local residents of Aspen, incorporating an ADU to provide
Ilousing to an additional Taclle family member.
We wisll to preserve open space on the lot for garden and trees, requiring us -
given the narrowness of the lot, and our desire to provide an ADU - to design a more
contained structure, We do not wish to build from lot line to lot line, which would not be
consistent witll a neigtlborllood feel or tile goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan,
The excavation variance will allow us to build an ADU witll sufficient ligllt and
openness wllile keeping tile entire structure scaled down to a neighborhood-friendly
Ileight.
The variance for a covered porch along Cleveland Street will break up tile long
run of tile structure along tllat side, providing a friendly facade.
. The parking variance would allow us to keep the currently available open
space as garden, wllile maintaining an historic use of a parking slot in front of the
existing garage,
I
We believe tllat our proposed structure will maintain tile small-scale
neighborllood feel of the existing home that lias occupied tJ:lis lot for fifty years,
consistent with tile goals of the AACP and Ordinance 30.
County of Pitkin
}
} 55.
}
State of Colorado
AFFIDA VIT OF NOTICE BY POSTING OF A
V ARlANCE HEARING BEFORE THE CITY OF
ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Pursuant
to Section 26.52.060(E)(b) of the Municipal Code),
The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:
L
A1
B~eV'"
. being or representing an
Applicant before the Aspen Board of Adjustment. personally certify that the attached photograph
fairly and accurately represents the sign posted as Notice of the variance hearing orr 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 Jl day or l1e.-f. . 199(e to
the '24ty of () c+ , 199.fp (Must be posted for at least ten ( 10) full days before the
hearing date). ("'~~wt..t::' ::;~~1) ~~. ..41
I- w--
Subscribed and sworn to berore me
this,li day of oJ
M lk'Jpr
. 199~ by
WITNESS ~y HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
My Commission expires: .3.,;)..</: cJ 0
~AA~:d ~) ~
~~;s Signarure
3-30
Address
e. A/r"h~
dsjX^- "
d:t"O/
4> 8'/6//
~
,
Marie and Christin Tache
1881 East Hyman
Aspen, CO 81611
October 24, 1996
Dear Ms Heyman,
We received a copy of your letter stating your concerns and criticisms of our proposed
development at 1001 East Hyman, We are sorry that we will not be at the meeting
Thursday to meet you personally and discuss the project in more detail. Your criticisms
were well-taken however, and considered without any bad feelings whatsoever. In
fact, your comments convinced us that we share a common vision of making and
keeping the neighborhood comfortable, This is our intention with each of our requests
and we are certain that when you understand them more clearly, you will agree that
we all want the same outcome,
The lot, belonging to my grandmother since 1962, represents alot of history for the
family in Aspen and we plan to create a dwelling that retains the feel of the
neighborhood, creates the least amount of impact to the area and enhances the
special quality that currently exists.
We are leaving the old garage for its look, its neighborhood feel and its utility, and we
want to maintain as much yard between it and the new house for the same reasons.
The setback variances will help us keep the new house small, maintain as much yard
as possible for a small lot, while still providing employee housing, Our plan will allow
more sun late in the day for the tall apartment building next door, (yours, I believe) by
not encroaching on the visual access to the West. rather than blocking that view with
another tall structure set forward on the lot.
Our proposed dwelling is planned at around 2100 square feet in total, (of which 500
square feet is designated for the employee unit, encouraged by the Aspen
Comprehensive Plan), leaving 1600 square feet for a local couple's primary dwelling.
Far from excessive, we think, I doubt if that size house has been built in Aspen
anywhere in recent years due to property values,
It is not our intention to build "lot line to lot line", We are only asking to match existing
setbacks and to create as much yard as possible for a small lot. The setback for the
dwelling on the Hyman side will be the same as all the other dwellings in the
neighborhood - ten feet. We are only asking to lower the grade in the front yard. The
sunken garages directly across the street are a bad e~le of the excavation grade
within the setback, This is not our intention, but illustrates that other neighbors enjoy a
similar variance, For us, the variance would give more light to the employee unit,
allowing us to keep it mostly hidden, and keep the scale of the whole building smaller.
2.
We feel that by lowering the mass of the whole structure, we will maintain the small
scale that is appropriate to the neighbornood.
On Cleveland street. we are asking to retain the line of the existing structure, This line
is consistent with the historic buildings that exist to the south, We think it's appropriate
to ask to maintain this encroachment, considering what we are trying to achieve for the
neighborhood with the scale of our dwelling,
Finally, I'm sure you agree that the alley is already a congested place. We would like
to keep it from becoming more so, even though by the FAR rules, if we were to move
our parking to the alley it would give us free floor area, Most developers would jump at
the offer. But leaving parking in its current form won't exacerbate existing congestion
and won't change or add anything from how it has been for the last 40 years. As far as
additional cars, three people have been living in Grandma's house for the last four
years - the same number who will be living in the new structure and ADU,
We feel the net effect of our requests will be mutually beneficial to everyone, and we
hope that upon hearing AI Beyer's explanation of our requests in more detail, you will
agree, We appreciate your input and concern, and look forward to being part of the
neighborhood.
Slo~e~ ?:/M/;/L r
Mark Tache
~' 1J.:
{/-III, I fON r-tc.lIE
...."
Nov. 7, 1996
Board of Adjustment
Dear Sirs:
I am very appreciative of the efforts put forth
by the Tache family and Al Beyer in trying to maintain a
viable new structure on a non-conforming lot.
Yet, In response to Al Beyer's letter to the Board
of 11/5/96, I honestly just wish that he could be clearer
in stating the requests for variances so that all of us could
understanrl exactly what he is asking for. I am confused on
several issues.
Confusion #1 -- on Page 1 (b) he states
duced bulk of the original porch scheme by leaving
level at 30" or less above grade (what is grade?)
by lowering the porch eave height."
"I re-
the floor
---- and
Then on Page 2 (c) Proposed AUD "I did redesign the
earlier scheme to reduce the amount of excavation required
from 5 foot to 3 foot deep." This is 6"10wer than the currently
allowed 30".
Confusion #2 how can the porch (pathway) level
be reduced, lowered and the ADU level be raised?
Maybe we all should ~now what the grade will be for
the new structure and the ADU from the required two sidewalks
and curbs. What are the elevations?
Confusion #3 --Parking problem. He states the park-
ing would remain as ,it has for the past 40 .odd years. I
40 years ago Grandma didn't have three to ,four dars, in~ater
years when she was housebound, ,except for a few visitor~, there
were few if any cars. Only since ,Michael Tache moved in (3-
4 years ago) ha$'"ethere been many cars.
I never heard a request to tear,down the garage, only
to turn it, add on and enter from the alley. The garage should
meet the requirements of the new home.
Page 2 (d) Al states "they are not changing the use
of the property. Confusion #4 Doesn't tearing down an existing
house, rebuilding a new larger house and adding an ADU change
the property??
I am anxious to see the model which has~ot been avail-
able,because since some members of the Board objected to the
, ,
mass on Clevelan~ - maybe it s because the covered porch extends
to cover the summer entrance to the South.
, ,
- 2 -
Ice and snow in our town is expected as in all
snow country towns, but that does not make for a hardship.
Perhaps the covered porch is too long. I reserve (urther
comments until I see the model.
I wish us all happy compromises,
Respectfully,
1/f~(~
Geraldine (GG) Heyman
970-925-1249
" '
AI BE' . ,:Jeslgn Inc.
..
November 5th,1996
Sara Thomas - Zoning Officer
Members of the Board of Adjustment
City of Aspen
130 S. Mill St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE; Tache Variance hearing November 7th, 1996
Dear Sara,and Board members,
I am writing this letter on behalf of Mark and Christin Tache. I represented them at the first
meeting and will be there this Thursday as well.
The first meeting was both productive and educational. Having received the 2.2 ft. set back
variance ("a") has allowed me to move ahead with the design work without going out on
such a big limb. In addition, feedback from the Board has helped shape the design and
given me insights to better approach the remaining variance requests "b", "c" and "d". I
plan to bring more detailed schematic drawings and a scale model to Thursday's meeting.
These should help the Board understand our intentions and the constraints of the project. I
also hope that each of the board members will have looked at the actual site in the context of
the variance requests prior to the meeting. The following reactionsfcommentsfrevisions to
requests b,c and d as discussed October 24th are also included for your consideration:
b) 6.7 ft. side yard setback for a porch.
The Board objected to the high stone wall on Cleveland St. , wanted to define the porch
more clearly and wondered if the variance was the minimum necessary to relieve hardship.
Although I believe that any concerns about the aesthetics of the stone wall are beyond the
Board's domain, I did revise the design to have a lower wall and lighter feeling porch
which I think could work well. I could not find any practical way to make the porch
footprint appreciably smaller because the porch provides a covered path along the house
from the front steps and from the garage. Removing the covering would create an icy and
dangerous pathway which would be an unnecessary hardship and impractical. I feel that the
size could be limited to 150 sq. ft. within the remaining setback. I reduced the bulk of the
original porch scheme by leaving as much of the floor level at 30 in. or less above grade as
practicable and by lowering the porch eave height. The variance request for the porch could
read:
A 4.5 ft. side yard setback variance to allow a one storey covered porch between the house
and the property line along Cleveland St.. The covered porch area within the setback shall
not exceed 150 sq. ft. .
.....
r / ,
AI Bf 'DeSign Inc
--
c) A 10 ft. front yard setback variance to allow excavation for the entrance to a
proposed ADU.
The only objection to this request came on the basis that an entrance could be made on the
south side of the house between the garage and house. I believe that a site visit and the
model will show how constraining the lot is. Hopefully, it can be seen that the scheme we
propose very successfully provides two separate entrances in a manner that each residence
enjoys a reasonable amount of privacy. Having an entrance facing Hyman Avenue is also
more consistent with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan and the intent of
Ordinance 30. Although I still believe that the entrance off Hyman is appropriate, I did
redesign the earlier scheme to reduce the amount of excavation required from 5 ft. deep to 3
ft.. deep. This will make for a more inviting and street friendly entrance. Please note that
this is asking for a variance to dig just 6 in. lower than the currently allowed 30 inches. To
reflect this reduction the variance could read:
A 6 inch depth variance for excavation within the 10ft. front yard set back on Hyman
Avenue.
d) A variance from the parking requirements
This variance is the most difficult to get approval for because we are part of a very intense
road culture and the space allocated to the automobile too often takes precedent over other
uses or alternatives.
The request for a building permit is the triggering mechanism for the parking "problem" for
this property. If no permit was needed there would be no parking "problem". The parking
would remain as it has for the past forty-odd years, no problem. Mark and Christin are not
proposing any changes to the existing garage or parking and as such are asking for the
existing nonconforming parking situation to remain. If they were requesting a permit for a
new garage it would make sense that the garagefparking situation be brought up to current
code requirements. Since they are not changing that portion of the existing conditions nor
are they changing the use of the property it is an added hardship to require them to provide
more parking than currently exists on site.
It has been suggested that the existing garage be demolished and a new garage be built with
access from the alley. While this may appear to be a good idea, the reality of this solution is
that it would displace even more garden space and would not be consistent with the Aspen
Area Community Plan. The AACP encourages sustainable design and sustainable
lifestyles. Building a new building in place of an existing one that works fine is not a
sustainable strategy and should not be promoted by the Board. The AACP also seeks to
maintain the existing character and small scale of Aspen neighborhoods. The garage is not a
historic structure but it does represent a scale and character which is all too often eliminated
from our community. I believe this is part of what the AACP was seeking to address and
preserve. The Board should reflect this intent in its decision making process and can not
promote the removal of the existing garage.
'''',',
.";[,.,,
......
,-""' '-..
, ,
AI Be\" ' ,}eslgn Inc
--
Given that the garage is going to remain, the only place to add more parking is in the small
garden remaining between the house and garage. This would add more parking than the
place has needed for the past forty years but would make the project fit the latest code. It
won't really change how the parking looks from the street nor will it remove any cars
currently parked curbside. It will just mean paving more of paradise for parking. The
hardship of dealing with such a small lot is obvious. Allowing the existing parking of one
and one third spaces to serve as adequate for this project is a minimal relief which can be
adjusted whenever the existing garage is removed. Please consider the following variance
request:
A parking variance to maintain the curreilt nOn conformity of the existing parking
conditions on site until such time that the existing garage is replaced. If the garage is
replaced then the parking shall be brought up to the current code requirements.
On behalf of Mark and Christin Tache and myself, thank you for your time and
consideration of this matter. I am optimistic that with the full Board present the
remaining three variance requests can be approved.
Sincerely,
N,:!yer~
;':.,
.....
-, "',
,..'-.,
Oct. 23, 1996
City of Aspen
Board of Adjustment
Development Application
RE: New Tache home located at 1001 E. Hyman, Aspen, Co
Hearing October 24, 1996
Dear Sirs:
I am writing as an interested citizen and neighbor of the proposed
new home at 1001 E. Hyman and the variances requested herein.
Since this whole property stated above" is non-conforming, I am
pleased that the family is trying to "preserve open space on the lot and NOT
buil~lot line to lot line".However requests numbers a, b, c, and d seem t;;-do
exactly this.
Request c is to ~uild to the-1o~line_on Hyman Ave. to accomodate a
courtyard entry to an ADU 5 foot below level, This must, of course, be protected
by a stone wall or fencing.
Every other building on both sides of the 1000 block of Hyman has
complied with the 10 foot setback requirement. I therefore believe this is an
unnecessary request. There appears to be no visible hardship (see sketch) that
would disallow the courtyard from entering from the South side of the home in-
stead of changing the appearance of the street from the North (Hyman).
Requests a and b is asking to build to the lot line on Cleveland
1) "a 2' 2" side yard setback to maintain the current nonconformity of the
existing structure" and 2) a 6' 71t'side yard setback variance to add a front
covered porch". Is this NOT building lot line to lot line?? It seems to
be both lot lines on Hyman and Cleveland noware being taken.
I believe that the Zoning
"maintain the existing footprint".
foot footprint J a~ . .~_ _....00::
Officer misspoke
The sketch shows
~n-- 1 . _c...
in stating that they will
an additional 200 square
Request d is for "2 onsite parking spaces allowing 1 onsite, and
1 offsite". I must say at this point that the language of this request is con-
fusing, ambiguous and completely misleading:
I belie'~ onsite parking means on the property and within the property
line. Considering a sidewalk must be built on Cleveland (and Hyman), and the
existing garage will take only 1 car, where will the other cars park? The
existing driveway as is stated in the variance request says " half of the
current parking spaces are on, the City easement". That means that a lot of
the present parking is on City property: The proposed new driveway is not long
enough to park a car, or-two,(see sketch). Also there is no such thing as an
"historic parking slot".
A single family house and an ADU immediately suggests a 3 car minimum.
Anyone familiar with this neighborhood knows that steet parking is a real
problem. I have spoken with Chuck Roth a the City Engineers' Department who
feels there must be more onsite parking as this location. I would hope that you
will disapprove this request ~s I believe all parking should be required to access
through the alley as is tradition in Aspen.
,.-' '"
-..'.......,
-2-
I would hope that these criticisms are not taken with any bad
feelings, but rather in a constructive manner that will make the new dwelling
more comfortable for the Tache family and their neighbors'.-
Yours truly;
~~l~~
Geraldine L. Heyman '
1007 E. Hyman, Box 4724
Aspen, Co 81612
925-1249
ADDRESS LIST
JON JACOBY
Box 3507
Little Rock, Arkansas 72203
KENIN HART
900 Jaymore Road
Southhampton, PA 18966
STEPHEN KANIPE
101 5 East Hyman #3
Aspen,CO 81611
MICHAEL PACK
5005 Texas St, Suite #305
San Diego, CA 92108
JULIE PETERS
Box 1643, Aspen, CO 81612
PETER HERSHORN
555 East Durant, Aspen CO 81611
PENNY SMiLlOS
1007 East Hyman #2
Aspen, CO 81 611
HELEN NEWELL
Regent's Row Ltd.
203 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81 611
PHILIP O'CONNELL
4260 Central Ave
St, Petersburg, FL 33711
WHITNEY PARSONS
Box 938, Aspen CO 81612
J,D. MULLER
Box 4361, Aspen CO 81612
jOELLE jviCDONOUGH
1007 E. Hyman, Aspen CO 81611
RON KRAJIAN
617 E, Cooper #114, Aspen CO 81611
GERALDINE HEYMAN
Box 4724, Aspen CO 81612
RUSS WIGHT
278 South Maya Palm Drive
Boca Raton, FL 33432
GEORGE BARTLETT
330 East Circle Drive
North Muskegon, MI 49445
A & S GROSSBLA TT
101 8 East Hyman
Aspen, CO 81611
JOAN GETZ
238 Catalonia
Coral Gables, FL 33134
L & E PROPERTIES, LTD.
145 South Grape Street
Denver. CO 80222
BARBflRA GAMEROFF
203 South Cieveland
Aspen, CO 81611
ANITA PIERCE
Box 3202, Aspen, CO 81612
JOAN SPARLING
300 Puppy Smith Street, #205-220
Aspen, CO 81 611
KLAUS OBERMEYER
115 AABC, Aspen CO 81611
THOMAS FELLMAN
801 North 96th Street
Omaha, NE 68144
JOYCE MURRAY
Box 352, Aspen CO 81612
MARK TYE
Box 8992, Aspen CO 81612
DAVID PEAALSTEIN
JOHN CA"1PBEU.
1 006 East Coop~r
n_.. ~^,..^.. A_.__._ rr, ,-,...,--...---,
oux I VJ'::J I. ,'"\::>;.;t:ll. .....v 0; I) I c...
Aspen, CO 81 611
RICHARD BURKLEY
SUSAN LUM
Box 1571
Aspen, CO 81612
709 East Main
Aspen, CO 81611
MARTY B. NEDLlN
80 Central Park West, Suite 21 0
New York, NY 10023
JUNE HOROWITZ
1290 Pembroke Lane
Topeka, Kansas, 66004
WILLI JEAN ELLIS
1012 E. Cooper #2, Aspen CO 81611
WILLIAM COLEMAN
278 Alta Vista Ave
Los Altos, CA 94022
CHARI SSE LAYNE
1012 E. Cooper #3, Aspen CO 81611
WILLIAM EVANS
325 East Hopkins, Aspen CO 81611
ARLENE MERANZE
6234 Pidcock Creek Road
New Hope, PA 18938
MICHAEL DORNEMANN
390 Lake Ave
Greenwich, CT 06830
NANCY WILLETTE
205 E Durant #lB, Aspen CO 81611
KENTCO L TO, PARTNERSHIP
One Northfield Plaza
Northfield, IL 60093
ROSE HECKER & ANITA ROSENFIELD
3952 Beard Ave South
Minneapolis, MN 56410
PHILLIP SCHRAGER
4343 South 96th Street
Omaha, NE 68127
ART REALTY
Box 8992, Aspen, CO 81612
CHUCK TOWER
Box 3014, Aspen, CO 81612
HALBERT MORK
77 Aspen Way
Rollong Hill Estate, CA 90274
ACBB PROPERTIES, LLC
250 Vesey Street, 8th FI
New York, NY 10281
CARL RUBIN
Box 260
Southfield, MI 48037-0260
BOB LANGLEY
200 East Main, Aspen CO 81611
ISABELLE HAMWI
2367 Club Road
Columbus, Ohio 43221
POWER PROPERTIES
1717 Olive Street
St, Louis, MO 63155
JEROME HATEM
Box 2675, Aspen CO 81612
SHERRI DARNELL
Box 8885, Aspen, CO 81612
00j~ eRA vVFORD
NEiL ROSS
1 00 S. Spring St, A::)fJ~i I, CO 81 611
Box U3, Aspen CO 81612
';
\U
t!..
\-00
\fI~
u
C\
Z
<:l:
-'
Ul
:::>-
\
..J
\.)
,.-
\-h'I'/IAI\l
,.-
~
.--
/8
I
/f)
I
I
I
I
I
/
,
I
I
J
f'Po~
c.o\J~
fI~H
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.L-~-
I
-----~;,..;.....----
GIl-~\~t
oil-
"
LJ)
(Y)
I . 0"1
I ~' _r>~
-L_-~-
\ , '
\ ~I~ ,
\ \
\ l ~",\\..
/ ~b'
/ ~
I
I
/
A\JtJ,)U~
CURB
-
,.-
------.,..-
~
.--
CONC 7933.1
.
~O\...\
/-
/
30.00'
- - ,
S 75009'11'E
'J" 1/
"'~
f~Po';
ItXCAII bN
MfA....
I .
0>
V
o
LO
.
V
-<
z
u
:z
o
u ~
SHED
TOP..Je
~
t?-Dw ./'
V'
.
.
-
,
/.,-- PArL\l.\NA'\i.i 6~ ')
lll""~ G^R^GE__ .
. -SC^B-79;!5 .97
TO f4iN\AlN
o
. , 5.2
"-
~ \~
""
\
N 75009'11"W 30.00' \
GR^VEL
ALLEY BLOCK 34
20.20' R.O.W.
~",\\
S\~~\..
"'~O
).7.707
790)..9
\\Oor
M.o\'\o I ,-!tire.
Art- ~~.
o
o
o
o
-<
U1f
B
0>
V
o
LO
o
...
-<
'"
~.
~
~
~'. ljro":. \'-0
-;).
~PU..
ffZOPo~ focrf'l2JNT '5CoHft-t/fl'lG.
OVtrt. IM~ 5'1~
'(t1 /(7PP) <;14tt.1J1i>1 ElJ6111lU~
I)I'tTEO .11.41..'( ir;1l\ \"\"Go
,-
\"
~\>,
,,\ "
?,\\\
~\\ \
" '
'"
,,"..
, \
~~.-
I (
, ,
I
: ,\
"
r.., ". .'
I . ",'
\,
l..,
,; ...
"\\,
, .... \',
~ \.\
'.\
,.---
,
"-"
!;.
::!l
~ ,--.
~ &
is ~
~ +1 ~
_ -\S:l -\I'
t:-~
,ell
-\
ll~
~
/
~,.~,.:..;..=-J;r !
~I\
[,1--11
\ :r
I \J
\ l!.
': 0
! lL
"
,
1 r 1 i n
mL~,-c" ~
t 1, \IJ
."- >
. ~
".t~. \l
,t l t
Jr., \
I
\
l' r;
, <t
._c"-;"'~
lllo Z
~i~,
~ "
?
~
l
\!J
~
a,
~i
~
e
J
~
\f'
'\
,
"
I
I
I
I
\
I
I "
i'
\
l'
..:2
~
<v
\J
'-../
['
.
~
t-
~
It-
~
-
~
~
i
I
t,{\
"It!
~Cl
~~
\'I.
v
1
Cj
~
4:
>
W
J
W
; I; 11),',
----J1D.C '';
" :; \ r:
,<iT ' ., ,"lH
; ...,. +4 f ",~1 '>
',' ", Ii:, ,~; ~
~:;-j '!' ,,!; lLJ~' .---.' ~~t ~ g~ ~I
t, " ~
I . . ~
,', , "-... -l' I' i
; . I 1
e
,
"
\
, I
\
" J-
"
\-
IJ'
~
3.1
l
I
,
~
~
IL
'3 <:l
- I
~:..
'()
1
,
, >\-r
J'<:>t.
.....~ -
-
\-t'YMA-N A\J €.
CURB
-
,/
-
- -
- --
--
--
-
-
.
CONC 7933.1
,.-
A'~'''''
/0
I
/
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
I
~,.$
S\~~\..
,..~D
\.7..707
- - -.,
eO\..\
S 75009'11"E
/
/
30.00'
-
'"
'"
I
I
/
I
'"
'"
STEPS
.....
/
/
/
i5
I
j
I
I
I
I
'-
o
N
.....
14.4
S \ \..\.. 7..:'
79:'0'
- - --
- - .....
'-
9
79o\"
ROOf
6 .1
;fll'l~
~}.\~, i Sf.
\-lOU
N
N
r'l
M.o\'\o 11~rc.
Art. ~~.
N
o
N
fD 0
0
0 20.4
0 4.5
..... 0
0
\ 0
I w 0
. .....
';i \ '" LoT UJf
v
>0:: A B
\U I 0 -'
I1'l '<
d. 0 3:' ~C4f.. * 0\
I v v
\-00 .....
,'/ 0
U'!5 z I1'l
0
u / '<t
....
V>
C\ u
z SHED
Z 0
" u ~
<t
..J
III
:?
......
\.)
.
~.
:;
I. r
~~
~
[j)~
"'+]t .
~1!: G\l-"''-J~\..
. J/~ . D\l-\\j~
I U\
I~
I $'
\. . \ '
\ ~.
\
\
/
/
/
I
/
t
I'
.
Ln
(Y)
0"1
r;-
P.\II""1- G^R^GE_ .
. -SC^B-T9~5-:W
TG? I'~\N
o
~
,
~"I/~I'=- \'.0
~",\ \.
5.2
......
",).
N 75009'll"W
'"
\...;
\
30.00' \
~
~l<.I'7i1 Ct:NVITI~5
ifUlt'\ IM~ 5l-t~
&'1 1(7~ <7l.l""!i'1 E',lC~I~P-$
I)hTEO JL.lL-'( i"1"* \'I'Ic,
'0
'"
GR^VEL
ALLEY BLOCK 34
20.20' R,O.W.
MARK TACHE 08-n
840 CEMETERY LN (303) 920-2533
ASPEN, CO 81611,1012
1119
f l~' I '. /0 Acl 192..6
:~~~~~.~;u. $~:<:JW
...... --ot_N.A. 'V
..... (303) 925-2500
NORWEsr BANKS IJ9$outhMill .:' ;::,e.< ,t' _._/ _~_'
;: IO'::;~~:~':?;!~~. ,~-
82-48511021
foIAALANOl993
Uoonto;"Grw>Geut
MI.Moran