The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutlanduse case.boa.320wbleeker.009-87 ..,--.~ , .. ~. , J ., 1 A_ [if( NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case 187-9 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 Council 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 24, 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, 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 surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. The particulars of the hearing and of the requested variance are as follows: Date and Tiae of Meetina: Date: Time: July 2, 1987 4:00 p.m. Owner for Variance: Appellant for Variance: Name: Dale & Sally Potvin Address: 320 West Bleeker Dale & Sally Potvin Location or descriDtion ofDrooer~: 320 West Bleeker Variance Reauested: Property is in the R-6 zoning category. Rear yard setback is 15 ft. Actual carport setback appears to be 7'4" and therefor encroaching into rear yard setback. Sec 24- 13.3 (a) no such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or attached in a way which increases its nonconformity. Applicant appears to be asking to complete the conversion of the carport to a garage in the rear yard setback. Duration of Variance: Permanent W1"11 I. t b t d b 1 ____ app 1can e represen e y counse : Yes: X Bo:__ The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Jan Carney, Deputy City Clerk ~ . .- ,..". CITY OF ASPEN ..",,; Case No.: Address,: 320 West Bleeker phone: 925-6096 (H): 920-2100 .Address:" Same Da te: June 8, 1987 Appellant: Dale and Sally Potvin Owner: Same Location of Property: 320 WeRt Rlp.pkpr T,otR N & Or Rlork 41r f:it'y of A.c::;ppn (Street and Number of Subdivision Block and Lot No.) Building Permit Application and prints or any other pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part of CASE NO.: TilE BOARD WILL RETURN' THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION. DESCRIPTION OF ..PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOWING JUSTIFICATIONS Applicant requests permission to install an overhead garage door to close off a carport. Permission was rejected on building permit application #10501, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A. The carport was built with the original residence in 1962 and is 7'4" from the alley'and, therefore, beyond the 5' R-6 rear-yard ~etb~ck for accessory structures (Sec. 24-3.4). An improvement survey showing the position of the carport and house on the lot is attached as Exhibit B. A recent survey of the carport/garage relative to the alley is attached as Exhibit C. The carport was unknowingly made technically nonconforming in 1982 when the gap between overlapping roofs and side walls of the caq:lOit wen' clos,;J "conn{'ct.ing" the carport to the residence. The R-6 setback for a residence is IS'. The overhead door is nonstructural and will not increase any existing nonconformity of the carport/garage which has existed in this location since 1962. Applicant requests that the Board of Adjustment determine that this is a nonstructural addition to an existing nonconforming structure that will not increase the nonconformity and, therefore, is allowed by ~24-13.5(a) or ~24-13.3(a). Alternatively, applicant requests a finding that the Board exercise its (continued on reverse) \'lIll xou be .~"epresented by counsel? : Yes -X- No cf:~t/j~OJjMI'1 ~dJ _ ~. ~<,/\~o.~~ (Applicant's Signature) ==============================c==========~===m=========aa====m============== PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO FORHAR D T~I~ APPLICATIAP TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSa:ENT AND ~EA 0 FOR NOT , ~Rl\NTING:~M\~-'/'.o ~ 'ii/'- Ij<..~b ~~o~ ~(~- .~ V:;) IS r ef- ~,C~~~ u% C.CV'A o.f~Ovc.-<> ~ k '7 4 ~,~ ~~~ru.o.Ar&-~~' :su.-J"'~ (~.3\~)NCl A.u.d.j\^-<J'^-~ S~~ ~ te...~opi 6. ~ w- G w?,-,\ 1fl-ba:.J" ~ ~ _' ' (v\1S<'--CAvH' ~~'*~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ,';1i1J~USV-- "'~ ifJ.- ~ 0-- O'f1J\..ouv-cr;~Q.o;\ '1 eM,}. ~rh~ Slot"' t .l; Sign,d PERllIT REJECTED, DATE ~ I) ry DECISION DATE APPLICATION FILED DATE OF HEARING r'l1\ ILED SECRETARY , .. "...t authority under ~2-21(3) to vary the application of the rear-yard setback regulation as applied to this building so that "spirit of ordinance will be observed, public safety and welfare secured and substantial justice done." On the issues of observance of the spirit of the ordinance and substantial justice done, the purpose of setbacks is a buffer for adjacent owners. Assuming the "connection" of the carport to the residence during the 1982 remodel changed the structure from a conforming accessory structure to a nonconforming portion of the principal residence, it is the least noncon- forming rear-yard problem on that entire block. Every other property owner on that block has either an accessory or principal structure that violate the rear-yard setback more than the applicants' carport/garage. In fact, all the buildings on the north side of the block intrude into the platted alley right of way. These encroachments are shown on the map attached as Exhibit D. Adding the requested door will be a benefit to the neighborhood, since it will block from view cars, bikes, garden tools, etc. On the issue of practical difficulty, it is infeasible to relocate the garage elsewhere on the property as can be seen from Exhibit B. On the issue of unnecessary hardship, the appli- cants have suffered two major thefts of thousands of dollars of tools, bicycles and sporting equipment from this open carport. Just last week, the police requested they close their garage door since there have been a lot of garage thefts recently in this area. Applic.1llts have had to move their windsurfer, bicycles and tools into the guest bedrool'l. . Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D INDEX OF EXHIBITS Rejected Building Permit Improvement Survey Recent Garage Survey Map of Setback Encroachments in Block 43 -, , ::-:;:: ,:~',l1!~ii ,'.:;';::,'~ i~::"'~~':;';';;;(,,"r<~.~~ii;:;.ht~;:-;[',,:;\,:'Jj;,;,~;~);~;~'J,~i.' BU I LDING PERM IT'APPLICA T10Nf~~;;i,~:%~;;~~..);,;b;:M "~<':"":J.i:,i) '" ~"';'-~. .',,:,. .'. "~. . '""~i:"',;~"~.~~i?;;}~~{~r;,." ,', ~)~:;_,::;;,<,;.E~:,."".' c' " - General .:..... -I ~BPEN.PITKIN.... ,.':;;:/.;;~~~k{:.~:..:f.};~.-:;.-; , --. . - -, -, Constructio."" ' . . ..,;.~;..-/,_,-, - ''':l,~. . Permit.' , REGIONAL BUILOINGOEPARTMENT;""'~" " . i. 'I~" '~" . '. " .',""'~" \" -~ . '"'-, -.. ""., .'{' d'?_,,";.?"~~,~ ,/" ...tIi..~"i;'f.;:"~....' "'~;'-'. a - -i.. ~~.--v'"'" :I.-,'~:<"" :"Jurisdiction of -;'i~':': . --.~:-~:r, .::i_ll:..~~l;~:~.:t~~:':,\~fJ.;<,~:{j~~:).'" ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER v :; .~:"-:,;~{;:.:;I:,~~.L"'-(' . -;,,:,1"z PH~N.. e:,:.,"S\ LICENSE NO. /~,/~_/;,~,'" ')v /:; ~~I(,~'~ .'1 tt 't.j{/"~>';;~ ~>':<~:A,,~/,,~',~:i:7~1f~pj~,l\~~ '7 ';. ENQINEE R . ; ,:.:::,~,~~'.~i;';,~J~t.~~\:;~~:,~~:~i~~*\~i~ip,~:~~~~!;;j~i~~t~~};~ft;F~~Jr~~'11~~~~~~:.~~,~'~'~,:~> : ; L"I~~NSE NO. - ,,' ," ,~ . . ~," .SOB Ee.1: Mel" Street: . Aspen, Color..do B1B11 30:a/925-EiB73 Applicant to complete numbered spaces only. JOB ADDRESS ':.')0' 1. ') , fe, (":1' , '," :.,.), 0"./'" r~rr: '~\~. BLOCK TRACT OR SUBDIVISION "/3' LEGAL 2. OEseR, LOT NO;, /(/ ~ 0 OWNER , MAIL ADDRESS 3. ?"'~ ,.~,..", "7--:,, ", .,/'./' <," "....:t.. CONTRACTOR 4. 5, 6, ~o~10501 . ...'~. .',' /' '" ,,: ;".".:,.;.:."....\-.<......,., ...,'.', : .' ';-r..' ~N''.:''I'~,~'~ .<.;J..,':',~,~.,(USEE ~TTAC,HED SHEET) ;..-<?;/:",~~,"~~"""":~,'~~',J:'":\'-"": ". '; ~~.:'I!:.::~~;~t/J. . z~p ,~~ .;-.:,.' ,~ PHONE ...,0//./; '7 J!,r..J.f'\ LICENSE NO. "<:;,;' .:" ',;.' > ",,;' 7. USE OF BUILDING" /' " t. ./1,(.":', i ..~c1i:~~t#~;~~:I,fjt~!.f~&.r$,!;f:fr,~~f.}~~~;.2.i, ..t"'T~ B. Class of work: oNEW,i , , " "","" o. REPAIRi~;'):~' MOVE:;;{~to WRECK '.J. .r;', -;. " '<"" ,., 9. Chang. of use from c;:; ....:~;,/~,."..~.",' '" r~"J..t!,.1;J, ... ..-';~'i:'- '. : .;''l','l''''~~~ .>.,1~. t;;~- .~, ';'::":'/' r. . "-;-,:,. ",^;:-;"" Change of use to /t: ~'" c,,::,A';:''104! ,.'~'. 1 o.Valuation of work: $ 771:;>' t~A.~'("f~/' 'J'/-o:r/' ;If' 11. REMARKS: i';'!'~' (": ~(" (.)"// .".,- /..,.. -? A ' _. I'.:Y~ ~A:>,;.:'," D'Qtl' / cl /> 'f~,...-I-,,-" ('-~_~",o{:j! ~"~'; t:'.f/' ,f J ,'1';", ./~,- .;/".... ~_"::"I' ...,J...J 1,(, ....;,~(.. ....j,/A' ',"'; /i. ') /'.... (4'1 /~.../..,/ " _ t"(.f(' '.' ""I"" .-">._ ,. ,.' ;. ;,......~ _F;.;"o"/,,l A,PPLICATION ACCEPTED PLANS CHECKED APPROVED FOR ISSUANCE BV BV BV DATE DATE DATE NOTICE SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REOUiAfi) FOR ELECTRICAL. PLUMBING. HEATING. VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL ANO VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZEO IS NOT COMMENCEO WITHIN 120 OAYS. OR IF CONSTRUe, TION QR WORK IS SUSPENOEO OR ABANOONEO FOR A PERIOO OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMEN.CED, t HEREBV CeRTIFY THAT 1 HAVE READ AND EXAMINEe THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS ~NO ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHFR STATE on lOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OR THE PER. FORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION. SlGNA1UIlf {)r CONTflAC TOI' {)fl AU1HORllF.D AG~NT (DATEI --.----. -.-.----- . ....,. ...HI. 1'.=""'.::0 PLAN CHECK FEE, '.', .w- 'tJi:':: . '. .:' ...t-;p: ...;-~t;~~r> '.:\" TOTAL FEE PERMIT FEE' Typ, 01 ConslfllcHolf "; . ,~., .." ',." --0. _-,":'" '" .;:" l.~ .'.;'. :"- :'.~:1>~:~ '~::'i,;;'.: i,\1~) .,);::::."~: Lot Ar.. ;Occ~~,I~c!~Gr?up -'.'.:<r', .' Slnol Building" ITotll S~~~r' ~t.! ~.,: .~~\i~>'~,'i; \' .;' Mill:. Dec. LOICI ,N~.tol StO~I" " ';" Fir, Sprlnklerl Required o V,. 0 No ':i-;'~~. NO. 01 DW:'Hl!,9 Units OFF5:TREET PARKING SPACES, .j;.~' .Colr"'d .,. Unco....rl<ll .' '~'l ;:"{j ;.~; -., Special Approlr." AUTHORIZEO BV DATE REQUIRED ZONING HEALTH DEPT. SOIL REPORT PARK DEDICATION WATER TAP ENG. DEPT. FIRE MARSHALL OTHER (SPECIFY) WORK STARTED WITHDUTPERMITWILL BE DOUBLE FEE , .. ~- ;1 . ;! 0, j' . ,:':,\:'" , .- --- ... ., .' ,.', 1, 1~ I \ I I ---- "'c.:..:..w' .. . , . .' ~"""Y""""""""\~ "'"'!("-,~11. .;-.,,:', " ; 1.1 J::'. > . I ' . ..; ,~ ",;., .. .; . iJ,,' ;'. t 'I' i ,~, ". ' ,,', ~ "I ',:jl, ~. ,;. .>1',:\.'(' '!/::" ,<r~,;~~t:'''''< ',j,~' , ~. e'!'l <' :',1 """i.; \ ,"';" :1 ,!:t~ ,'~, .' J,:~" ~,>..Ij:.l\~.:;,~//: :.';.,',; ;,.:.::.;:<7.;:':;'."'';~: " . ~'i-.. 'to, ,.~I. .~ :" ..:. 'I,', I,; i ..( j.to ,_..1,-' . .'~ t, ",:',1,.' '. ..', j. '>l};:<~;!';:~r./' '. . II 11 II II II 'I I , ., , , ' "I . ~. lo,,: ~.. ,'." II " 11 iI .11 II I .' I , I ,'" ,.'" ',0, '>gi)~hi;'I' '',:';,' :':-;";'::T:~:;( 'tr.d.'. ," < ''\'..:-1 :~""",:J -F+ "". -:. I~ ':.~I I;;"l~! ',: J",."~" ,\. l' ';', \<':. ,I ',' ,c, , , '\. 10 -r.-." ....., . I, . ~,.' ",-:"\" ';:', '.'.;: ''of' J~_ ,t,.; ',J';o/ I; ,J~ r/',' ~'. ~ ':;' y\ :\I<Y.' " f::.:;:;'. '. ,'. j ,1"' ,r ::;J,z';" r'}l:;r;!lri Irt,'~;'~d. ii'.' - ., r,.: ','!,'\':;:t:\II I ,--' 'I ; I i~'i,:" ,;"Lr.;:,''::' ':1':" " \::/:\")X{:':'\ /~"l'\ :" , ~ ; r, d. "{_Il,' 7" " , >;'''\ !~'(., ...," :..<i:~i,:~~ '-~"l,:.i\! \,'~, ',' ,,' .;, !t"':; l' ,,,.(,, I ~ ,.' "',' . ~.~ ~<;" '. .' 1 r; ;." '1 " ~I. t..' I A;' 10/' " ....'. '::::'!I..fI;,:Yi>:'" . '.'1 , . \..r 'I" :"" . '1~,11 ; ,I.' ;' .1/' . .J/,:,' . 'I ~ >..d- '/ . ". ;. '~'\;i~J:,! .f;1',,\V'r,,( I"~ . ,.1 .i' I'" " I'." i oM . ~ ,I ~'..,I' ,',l~ )'I~,: I !i ',; . I. ~ ;.' ,to' I :-.1.',.'; I' I i I' "'1'" I " '.I(,i I' Ld l. ",', ~' ','i." ~;'. . .. .,', .. j ~ '.' " ~~.-~t:'I.~ '::\.\~J/;: " "I ...... '.. \ \. .. :'1')""'1' II .j 'J ,<;1'" .... "1 '.' '.1 't \~.'. . . ',,~.., '\. . '.' "":'.,,''',1 ... , i ii" ," ',,'" ~!' :,!A;"<:'}, 1.;'\ ", ~ ~\':' 1 .\ :',' .i~ I" 'n :.' ~....l", . ~,,"; ,'. . . /~,' ',,1'-" :"d,j I ': ~~l J~~~?li!,i~::' V;I' ,I I~l (''il,.: )},,,' !I~ 'f ~'~ Y/I'I"~W' r:~ " il': ,,'I ."( ~ '"'I' ,~ ~-.....,-" I). ,:; ; I ':1' I,' , :7:.",:....'}'.._I'... ' ',,"''i'll-'' f....~', ,'- ,",,---.- :~'< ';:~',!:'c:'H~"\ ';/ ':' , 1 ~ ~: . . I ! ,,' \ '" '-'- , .' , " 11.;. " r=~-=";11' '. ",;; i .;" , - II II II II I, II i. ., ~'~ . :Ii, ~., :<, ,.:) ~ ' j , ':1, 'I 1 )-- 11-" \1 I (I " , " .,' 't.'.:" 1..- \" .. \ ~ 'I. '. , " " " 1,1 t. ;1 , ,:V' ,) \. I .~ -"-' , , ',j !. "",:':"; 1'" ."'l:, "'- ~ '1 ~ " .3 ~ ~ lot ~ ~. \. .. (\ 'fi. 1--' , ."l ~1 ~ tJ V '~ '\. -j ~ o \ ", . ~ , .. '-:. " ,;:. ',' ~ \, 1 " "',' 'f- ..:i ,:::::: ., 1 ,~ 1':: ~ .\ '~ ...... ....... ,f: ~ .\J <. <.i. ~ ~ 't ........ ... ~ " ~ ';;' .j... l. G ~ .' if '." :,~.~;,,~ ",,' ~ a 1'-.. t\ 1'. ~ ! " ;" " . ,:"l:!;'.! ' \:1,:. . ,<' II "'j'I,', , ' I. ,-.-..--,--...--,,- " ""J.' ,) , . '0;',' ':., "i<<~;:"~;i:.:,: '. ..",~I;:.~"...},~.t,t. ~ .~ :.' ".,l~ ': j -' jJ. . ! "".'L..' .li. "",,',,.: " ;.1 , 1 .., ;Il! ,:' ",' ! ''['I ",':, -\-' . I.!"l.j! \ - ~' " !;I " :',i:'I" i ': ..:~~~.-.~' "v ,tI ... " , 1 , - , '. :' J .'- "t .} ',:> It ~ .., - , , ......... 1'- l. . - .... ') ,l.) ,,~' l-) 1 < -~ '1- \ o ,'1 ~ ~ '" . ~. - '~ , .J " ~\, ~ - \1)~ '( ::::. \ ",l ...... 'of. \l ( .... .. i- t) ~ --;1' -.:. ~ <<. ~ ~ :.\. <0 , ~ q,;, ,~ .' :t- "' "\ ... " (; ,~ 'f, J ~ " ~ ';t ... " , ~ ~ ~~ " 'l. . ~ ~ ..::: tI .'" .,:: u OJ "1- .. <.. Y. 'I:) ~ 'l( - ~ '1 ~ t"") " tI ~"> .... It .. ...,~ ~ - \D...,J . -I I I I I I 'I I II:' , ','" ~' ,',-1 .. ~ "''S-~-W':::----~~;';';:~ " i .-\-+ ',' ...J;..4.. ".j' ,'., , .-" ,:;,/ ,..,' ,',' ", . ,'. , ;,;:."..1'. . I'" I ~~. ':. :", ' '......".. ..,C' ,.' _/\ ~,::':!,'p,;:;:: ,{"",.,')' .\' \' :'~ ,. ~:, ::'d . ''-'''i;' ;. :'i~' , ': '/ ~..~;~;: ,',. J"';' " ," : p.' " .t,' : ',I ~ .': ,II' ,,~ ' - , '.,' .': ~,; '. ..' , 'i .... , 'j' ; rl'~. , ',~ ' -'. , 11; I ',t,;'Ji ...f\; , ,H I U' '--"-; ,',' ", ',1; ;,,; 'I, ~ I' ~ :,; ,',I -.' '" . 'P'J,... ".~t-.:;.:i.' , \ , ~ " : " . , .., ,~~, ~ "\1 '.1 ::t1 , :'r'\. ;.... '.,,:.\ 'i ') . , , ..:'" '<1:,' ~ 1',il':~':,;':~I~ \. .,'\.., ;":',,,'~!' , ~,\ ~, ' ~' f:''''J. " :--\' I'~. . ~ ~ .' r- . ,.' ," 'l lA, 'I. ~ 'It' . .. -} + Q " '.. ,& 'j '~'\ ' h;j \1 7'1 V .... ~ \I~' ~~:41 ,': ~ \J'~ ~ ~ .' '."" V) ~ \\l .p ,- .,' ., ' j:1 " ~ '~ e. I"~ rl..... I. " ~ ' 'j I"~"/"""",'._l; " ,..1 , ~, _...~.:~ . i--'~ r! I , < i-.. , " , < ! I I i , u_ i' , . i- I I ! i .....", i i ,_~ .,it 4- '~'l_"')F' _\ o:;-i_"li...'.tj /" i' I , ! I i , j ! " " ! I -~,-_...----,~-.~.._---- ",,). i j---..: ~<'" i I I I , i I ~ ..-._---,.._..~ " .J I' I r= ~..: -'--r-'~----- 1--.:.-. ; '-1 ! , r.:-- ~-_._-_._-_..-.__._-- , (, ('i -r ....' " , . ~ '"'\ - r I , '---, " . i ! i , i \-\=l>vYV'j~ ~vv~\I;",,~ i ! i ; , I ---~~ i 0 '" /J L._.- , r. ~ ~ -"'\ N " ''-'' 1, l" , I i L 't , < , , (, o \.1 Q '-oi 111 .~ ""1 ir, , 1: Z fA. L L [ I' p) L K +"? co,7500q'II"[':.:. wO(X)' -- - 7 (;' _c:,l~__s:V~~_~~!,~_ . " . l't Y "f.!. ... ..vAL\.. \ >-ll(KNfS7'? O_V,?'.I I 1 r- --, - --- - ,-' - -_..-- GARA~ ","" l. %' ..l I I N o , 7'4' I -1 I 1 I I n ~ 't- ~V ~-':.r e~^J"r/-- 1 ", (7) j....'J ...:r1I'_-') , 1 1 \ i.~ J i,,] 11. :r () Q " ~ - .L " " \) "- U " ' ~ B (j~ .j'I(,- ~ 1- ~ f~ o l' -.f\ I 1 ,~ -...... N 1<:>" D'I' J I" vV (pOCXJ' 'J' n'Ut-H): F_.L_P,I'~..j~, ,', l-'j ...:r'I~;' I ~, . ~'/' 'I' i. !"-'- ~. f-- r~', :-. i ',,- , I \ \ . \ "'---\ \ .<~\.c .' ,~' ~ .. // / ,:) x ---.J 1O o III OJ r fTI fTI . "7':------ fTI :::0 .------ (I ( , v ~) l I,__J" r >< ...J. /' /1 , I~ i \\ I \ ,+ ~~~<- rr= ~~ ( 1\. I I )~ (J) " (.0 \>< 0 \ '. ,../,.'------......--'\ " r 133C:J1S -- P ..J~~'" ": J'\ ---.J ill ,,0 o t> \ I -- r\ I } , \ ' ( . ~~ t I !::> r r !::> ~ It 't J i , \ \ \ ) \ , \ ' , ( ~ \' ~' , '--" a', I ' \ I \ n --___<t-.-..----- . \ - - \~. .- - \ \ I '. \ \ \ \, "'-.-......... -'......-^---_.----'"~./ 'l:vr"'tl - t>l ~ i ~ i rr .__~_ ~~ \ \ IJ-------.....--...--...~-" . ...,~~~~- " o ..r--.._ ~ ~ ( , , I /- , I r' .... ). ~) 00 133C:J1S c >< ---.J (Xl CD :"i /'\ ~~) -~ ~ rj.J~\-,,, \ I ' ..... " I ' ,.. ~) , "\ , -' \'---. ~- ~~ _.~: . \ [- \11 r ;, "-""-" I~ \. . , .,..... \' \ '. . I '- '\....,J I I.. \~,-j ~ , ''-'- -'r,\.. '- ~. - o mJ X /"- .j., - ) PHYSICAL SECURITY SURVEY The Potvin Residence 230 W. Bleeker Aspen,Colorado 925-6096 Conducted By: Officer Steven R. Smith Crime Prevention Officer City of Aspen Police Department 925-2025 , --<. .,~ -'1I/<.....;j J Aspen Police Depanmcnt . 506 E. \1J.in Street . Asp~f1, Colorado 81611 I (J03 j ')25.2025 ) J On July 15,1987,a physical survey was conducted at 230 West Bleeker, Aspen,Co10rado., The survey was conducted upon the request of the owner Salley Potvin,who accompanied the officer on the survey. IDENTIFICATION OF SITE LOCATION The residence is a single family split level located on a well travelled two-lane road,and is mid-block on the North side of the 200 block of West Bleeker. The residence is bordered on the North by an unimproved alley. Neither the street nor the alley has adequate lighting. To the East of the residence is an open grass lot,and to the west is a private residence surrounded by trees and shrubbery. The residence has been remodeled and the exterior is constructed of tongue and groove wood siding. EXTERIOR LIGHTING Front: Lighting is provided by three incandescent light fixtures mounted 6 feet off the ground by doors entering the master bedroom,living room, and foyer. Lights are encased in decorative fixtures and are 100 watts. East:One incadescent fixture located at the door entering the kitchen. North:There are no sources of exterior light at either the garage no the residence itself. West: There is no exterior lighting on the West side of the residence. RECOMMENDATIONS Minimum: 1. Install one 150 watt flood-light under the eave of the center of the East side to more effectively illuminate this area. 2. Install two 150 watt flood-l ights under the eave of the North side, (rear), of the residence to illuminate the entrance to the garage and to illuminate the North side of the residence. 3. Install two 150 watt flood-lights on the West side,under the eaves,facing down,to illuminate the area between the residence and the shrubbery that is approximately 12 feet from the home. Optimum: 1. Install protective grating to cover the flood-I ights when they are ins- talled. 2. For the front,duplicate north side lighting recommendations. .~ ,.,",.__0:>"'.....",...,.,. '.,..... ,L;.,,; "~ J -' EXTERIOR ACCESSIBILITY Front: Windows consist of full length plate glass ranging from 10 to 15 feet in length. In addition,the basement windows are "rollout" design which are double locked on the inside. Ingress to the residence is through a solid oak door equipped with a ! inch,single cyl inder,dead-bolt lock. Ingress is also achieved through sliding glass doors located at the master bedroom and the living room. Said doors are secured by clasp-hook lock and frame bolt. East: Windows at the basement level duplicate those at the front as well. ~ddition,a sliding window is located over the sink which is ap- proximately 12 !e~t from the ground. Ingress is gained through a sliding glass door at the kitchen,which is the upper level ,and dup'licates the design of the front sliding doors. Ingress is also ach'ieved into the garage through a sol id core door,equip- ped with a spring 40ck door knob. West: Windows consist of the same "roll-out type windows and are also double locked from the inside. There are no ingress points on the West side. North: The only windows on the North side of the residence are located on the West half of the North side,approximately 10 feet from the ground, and are 3 feet wi de x 1 foot high of the i dent i ca 1 "roll-out" des i gn. CRITICAL: Ingress is gained into the garage,which is connected to the residence through open access. The garage has no doors. Said garage contains a variety of tools and recreation items. Ingress to the home is gained through an,oak frame plate glass door,equipped with a 1 inch dead-bolt single cylinder lock. RECOMMENDATIONS Minimum: 1. /1,11 sliding' glass doors and window should have wooden dowels available to place, in the trac~s for security,particularly during extended periods of unoccupancy. 2. Garage doors should be installed and proberly equipped Vlith security devices to prevent open access to the garage. 3. The East door entrance of the garage should be equipped with a 1 inch single cylinder dead-bolt lock. Optimum: 1. Garage to residence glass door should be replace with a solid core oak door with a single cylinder,l inch throVl,dead-bolt lock. 2. Trim lilac bushes on the Vlest side to a height of 3~ feet. I ) .J CONCLUSION The residence surveyed employs some basic crime prevention hardware. But such measures are defeated by critical areas outlined in minimum recom- mendations. Sliding glass doors and windows should always be equipped with dowels in the tracks to defeat forced entry to windows. Most sliding windows and doors are not designed to prevent forced entry. The increase in lighting will serve to discourage any perpetrator from "caseing" the residence. It should be noted that the residence has been the victim of a burglary as a result of the lack of garage doors. It will continue to be a target of opportunity until such deliquencey is corrected. If the previously mentioned recommendations are employed,security of the residents,and their property will be considerably enhanced. Thereby hardening the residence as a target of opportunity. If there are any questions regarding these recommendations or techniques in applying such,don't hesitate to contact the crime prevention officer at the A.P.D. at 925-2025. --- ., AB~PITKIN REGIONAL B INO DEPARTM~NT DCORRECTION NOTICE 181 STOP WORK ORDER /~ JOb Located at.:J~ to, ~~ /l;,-wAl I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and have found the following Violations of City. County and/or Colorado State laws governing same: /) A ~(r /s ~dt~ 71J 6V40sc A- ~-er. 4;) ~ HEG'.) 12. / #/Z' mtl.-U.- flHwG.6ltl Tlf6 ~ ANI) C?lA-1(a(16. ~ l6u.. ~ IJ I:y" 5(}L/ /) u!u- /)O()/t.- IScf'ZVG6'.I /tht.lr~ ANO 6AfU4HF. ttJITI~ &oJ~. C) "'fA- U d.c;<;l) ~ flla~ ro 7)~-dM/K~~jUa I~XlI4U,-y 7lJ fll&fJr;gry 4Nfl. You are hereby notified that no more work may be done upon the premises until the above violations are corrected. If you do not communicate with this office now, this matter will be referred to the appropriate' authorities for enforcement. Failure to correct the violations may subject you to a civil suit for an injunction, or a fine, or both; or to misdemeanor crimi. nal prosecution, which upon conviction may carry a sentence of fine or imprisonment, of both. IdlY ~ .. Date Inspector for Building Department Building Department Phone 925-5973 Phone: Aspen, Colorado 81611 DO NOT REMOVE THIS TAG ---"-'-~ 7. UCR CO'l;:! '1; p ..J ----..~- -t 18. n,:'C f ('try [J<\t cr W ~ "'-6 f Xr:CI>~;')n~,! CICil " ) Victi'n F(lijur ) [)tlplic"ti~ en 11. RcPOrtin.2tOllllCY ., Cilse Report NurnlJnr fJ F' /./ S'j -- "1,"" / ') no OFFErJSE REPORT ((Fjy" ~, - .....' ~, kp()rt f'lumber~ 1',4., Initial Offense Clilssifica~pn ~. ~_rk' C, @'- 't!rG. 0 {- F ~--.' ;," y 7 ~ ..;/I';? r:' '/ ,t'--f:.j J /7":? (/ 1"--- I)'" -_,...".J <<- - .4.,?- t....)(., ) ~ /~. ~~ ~__ I ":blCR Sco,o 10. Ofhmse Reported: 11. JU~~llile-i cJ / 12. CCIC Entr'). Dine/Time !.X'i Dispatch ( ) Citizen ( ) Yes ( ) No ( ) On View ( ) Supervisor (,V") Unknown ciTime ll~-,~~JRI Nl),Tlbcr 11~. VCA Disposition ( ) Change to ( ) No Chilnge Rem"llns j / /~'/1''':'/'!'/'~'' , <- .~...,;. 1~.' c. _/ (\:10pen ( ) Unfounded ( ) ClcMed by Arrest ( ) Exceptlon311y (k...red .._,___.._..1.. rflncf' C;),C','HY: 17, UCR EnuV D",C'T,",e~ eta Pro:;nCIJte ( ) I-'ro,;ecute for LC'lS8r Ch"rge ( ) Juvenile ( ) Other JUflsdlctlon Operator I D ilrges , ) S(.sp(!c;lln(~;1!Cf'rilted ( ) Su~~wct Death ( I Declined by D A ]-;'~ UCfl O{l,,", '-yo, lJCR Off,,", ft.",ul1 2l. UCF~ Officer 22. VCR Officer 23, vcr< Oflicej As~ault Weapon Assignment AssaurtTlme Assault Score A!,sau!t Cleared - - ->---- , '4"~ 25, Goo Coco urrence 1 {)I."<!I::C,.- 4)r"',~ ("'t,./" M09.'''][>Ov Year Tim2 27. Date - Time Month D,y Y('~IIIT1J c.". : -1 jJ"- f0,"~i Reportod on _1_ _ _ _.I": - - - ~ -- a " ~'" l ~ 1 ,- or between /"/ . / _::;. >i~)- u . ~~/c"" / / I r '~_ '~~!__ '-;' " ,Y ____..0....-. ._ .. - STr.TE.of CULuRA ..-- 3. CO,lnect~"J C2se f 10. UCH G I, c,~ r Assaull t. cti'lilV -.. 24. Lor:...ti0<l orOce " o -' .~) ') J.-"C , .~ i, ~' . I"' 26. g~:~'n~T:'-;':-1 1 I~ ~ 1- V - Victim RQ - Registered owner RP. Reporting Party L15T FIRM NAME AND CORPORATE NAME, IF Dlt'FERE!-...lT CODE: W _ Wit'.,e~5 Lp. L;:.st Person in Pos~r~ssion TH. Title Holder 0 _ Discovere:d Crime PA. Person Accepting Document p. Person Sr:r:uring PremIse I I -2/B,/ca1'.:: :;0!,~I,'-'~-(La~t, First, Mldd1d ---r;-o. s;;:;. :.n.Hace 32. Age 33. Oalf~ oll~irth 34. Occlip,nion ~I ,,'~. (l-,?,',7e:,.. ),.~___/.,; /;!? /}~:( , ~;/ j':- </-1_.1,/7 ) 1-1 "'___ . _" __ _ .. -..) _ t , If,:;,- _ I.!-.!:"'__ I "--"'} (7 "3" Addt"r~ Zip Code 3G,.Tel(;,)!lone (~-,D'vl 1(' r "'""'_" _ "_' ,:: ~L,__ r>1 v , 'I w _'--_ <.L--~ ~j.Q'.__t.~"::':.~:~r:-_________________f'!.b~_ j"~2~~:_>{.Jl "J ::... ,- 1. L-:- ~-i .....-' ., --),'..... I Bus. -..,,) __,' r:....- .{,.;l}',!'~J-I-.ff ~:.,(~i.,\,',_){-/,-~ I o f 28.Cud(: )S. N;:II;~e {llSt, [--,;-;;-r::1i~w~- 33. DaHl of !3inh 34.0ccu;")atit.Hl I I A."(jd;~~-'- Zip Code , I ( 1 i I. Con- J Live K.-~L-j $ """oul" r "00' l~C '1$ ,:~o'a',,~ I' __ ___..J_( '-....: $_~~, _f___-' I I 36. Telephone (x" Day) ( I I~~: - ~'7--:------'---r; ~ I' , I A~-'- ^" I ,~:"o,,,.. !~;",",,,, prc.;'('~___JI~~~~~~.__il_~_:~~:::'~.J~~~~i:?:_ ... ,~ -l> ;: STOLEN t ~S!' _._,-- ::':--_-_1:,'_ S : H::COVE:-~Y ,L :a. :{s. ~Br pnOPFRTY ITEMIZATION, USE THE fOLLOWING FORMAT: 39 14~. 14!. 142, _ _~~~~. I~_~~_~.~~~r.<lnd Nl'lme Property Dc~~rif)ti"l1(lI1Cludc Seric' --------------------------- D. V€hiclt:! I::.QHicc F. Radio, G. Fire- H.I.louse- (Lac;>!) Equipment TV,Caln.cra5 arms hold gao<.is $ $ $ $ $ ~7Cr.l S $ $ $ $ $ I'lumber) ($1 ($) 4f.. UCR P .operW Typp. 43. Stolen 44. Rccov':Ored 37 I , I i ~f/'/ C{U~ N.'to.r C /. _:,f'/s I"A/~ TMlh<' v ,. ) 1e-cl.5' -f "J( ,,7 lcJC' .A.C' "-" . I /7' ./--; -..II / I 6?:r~,; <~ fod '.t'lJ h," .,.e; I ^ ....__ I C(.- I .1 ,-". , I '" > .... ~ Cl: Cl: ~ Z 7 ).,(7 fL.,l i tt. .y. '>f'I.." LI ,fft ,h'",- J 0\..<1 (J(/< .!'\.T 11... A1,/'-: '/ r./ ,,,,,,,J t..,'.t., ..s .... . / , / ",{,,~;<,d rIC..~ r- .::.... ~r I T'-" t; b;.1 ~ ,..iC-J/' .1-'~> ,-:1,., ,p L / /L~~d e It /'f-' ro? ~4 ,-~ II I ~'; tUlle.. "'c ,.~ / f ,:);\c:.d I <JP r-.J I I( j.> (''cd l:!'r T I c.:-",d Y"2- J-I't~t:('..-l 7(c ,:c'".../:J"i.'<:'. r-''''' /""1~ ~t )- /1/ }':ttl/i">' .:',-d~'1~5,<,j tL,t _I ),"""~#c{"" n' tc~~-i~ 4 ~;~ ~/i.r. ~~\I'':-~'''il,.t -, l, 'i /1...1 .,,"'0(t""1 ~lY ::.~l~--I,~.~\-;-;-j;7"~U~;;;~~,ll to !rIP' ,In<1 (IHII'! I I 1u h..~.j' ~-". ./ j r tJt'7CJ"' ."\, 1- !try ,..;,- . ,. r, -/ -' ' I 4.~ J J ." 6 {"! \ /-j 86. Oper. 1.0. ) Yes ( Na ,:j'j" /sl..", -r J .......,~ " \''' r:0"~' L., .",01 Un!! ~,u. ^ .',1'1'1<.' i 1<) -""/ '- _.f" '-.',. /~ j 1// , ---J;'- f'.'LI'~ _.________ ~;.;lll,il'" <', N .1" '("'I 4 ~~ ~ ;" I ,,' '_ ~. "" " 1'"l1.)1-, .",.1 IJ,lll' 77 ell:' 1- 1 . STATE nHOlORAOO CONTINUATlON/ FOllOW UP SHEET )"'.0 -' <t ffi 38. Z w Cl Section 4. ~itial Offcllse Classification... (/ A.1_-1",-, llC /, ,,- I C>I... ,,/ ~-> ~::' ,,"- l.(: IF PROPERTY ITEMIZATION, USE THE: F'OLLOWIf\JG FORI\il/\T: {~t();~, w > j: <t a: a: <t z 43.. 45. 39, 41. Brand Name 42. Property Description (Include Serial f'Jumher) UCR ProDerty Typo Itf~m No. Stolen ($) Recovered ($) .t2h'I? Iod?c?S' ?>t~d b.e SC'A" /:::>ec/- , 6 W tt..Q )- C) -f /11 i I'... c I €_ 'o....d/v/s..c1 ,,{',-t'>7 !k- tpJt rC'< c /'" cI 11....e. , A 6j<~kCI (f;"""c,/,'(J"'- --C" t.. cI iAe h;) c: ::f I-"/j CJ'1' lh..Q i)tCI'~h '/ 'ZLz e 1/.. '" '"I ,"t , L ~)Hle CtJ"jj, i tJ112<ft- rll; CJ:f' , 14- : tZ]:J i(hOLc) k.1 <"- w/lt.. ~)"'c7l$l-';: I T 4..,_ ..,...-i / I t'lte hu t t<,( 7h. ! ul/:>" I J".... , , /je,'~ra_"d ;,~s r ",fi 7L. I, ! 'k hAf <'t'd VIS-eel 1/.<<;; i A......d z he I i ( k ! ; CCtc//~ 1+ (] ~ v'e. U<.~ G..~, I <f.fc le"'--! I 2> t> I.'r , j " i 14.._ b .'X J <",--II CJ,,-:.;,yt.s>#,:v~) ?dl 1/ I I r';( f,fr ~...<' i.,", 0,:., feu' c:" r- {9 (/'-" 10.)1-- of [<skis i It?\,/ C:1..hJ i ::felt ; 7~f : Ii., )/?..?>/~ h".:i';'cw 5" t<?~" '( 7fu, '" ""- (S-a / f'-i.c& i_~~j Jv /;57 jk ~;:.,-o i nL(J'tc",..,Oi<.S I k)e h:>.., c.<Y'r e. tUtHl~'Y /.:"'./ I h",7JG"J sfc._ f<~)j f t. <_ { ~ JnCit/cicl I -h. ';,{t's C<trrovT c...9C~S ",,-;f1u'l"'i'',;(l J2, , <,',o<',~'-'<.f-,-" ./ A: bee.-'L- lJ / Ii /thA- I r, _ ! I ''r-/' ! --1_ '_ / iAJ.I. I..~.'. _~1...' 11(.~~J ~ecf ! '?i.1. $,",sl... i ~ A t;~;1e - t-<.JCJ<< I./b J To Y h:J VI ~"- onk~ 7Ja/s <5 71.fej 'tJ..c~f 71..0 , 14LJ!_ .'> r 7:1v., let!- i d' f1" I ~ a-.... ' Jt~ '''c:&1-1- "f1",Hers I 04 7iJ4L A..c...d hi' '" I ~ ');', (Jill, ," ~,;"I!ldl""'. N'II11ln" ,11',1 Urll! ir w 4'J. ~;<(I""VI'''n 1"'1...1\ .lIHI!),,!,' 0' r ) "-1 "-. "'J ,( 1'<1'1" 0' 17 CLEF 7 ) PHYSICAL SECURITY SURVEY The Potvin Residence 230 W. Bleeker Aspen,Colorado 925-6096 Conducted 8y: Officer Steven R. Smith Crime Prevention Officer City of Aspen Police Department 925-2025 ) Aspen Police Department. 506 E. Main Street. Aspen, Colorado 81611 . (303) 925,2025 : ) ) On July 15,1987,a physical survey was conducted at 230 West Bleeker, Aspen.Colorado. The survey was conducted upon the request of the owner Salley Potvin,who accompanied the officer on the survey. IDENTIFICATION OF SITE LOCATION The residence is a single family split level located on a well travelled two-lane road,and is mid-block on the North side of the 200 block of West 8leeker. The residence is bordered on the North by an unimproved alley. Neither the street nor the alley has adequate lighting. To the East of the residence is an open grass lot,and to the west is a private residence surrounded by trees and shrubbery. The residence has been remodeled and the exterior is constructed of tongue and groove wood siding. EXTERIOR LIGHTING Front: Lighting is provided by three incandescent light fixtures mounted 6 feet off the ground by doors entering the master bedroom,living room. and foyer. Lights are encased in decorative fixtures and are 100 watts. East:One incadescent fixture located at the door entering the kitchen. North:There are no sources of exterior light at either the garage no the residence itself. West: There is no exterior lighting on the West side of the residence. RECOMMENDATIONS Minimum: 1. Install one 150 watt flood-] ight under the eave of the-center of the East side to more effectively illuminate this area. 2. Install two 150 watt flood-lights under the eave of the North side,(rear). of the residence to illuminate the entrance to the garage and to illuminate the North side of the residence. 3. Install two 150 watt flood-lights on the West side,under the eaves,facing down,to illuminate the area between the residence and the shrubbery that is approximately 12 feet from the home. Optimum: 1. Install protective grating to cover the flood-lights when they are ins- tailed. 2. For the front,duplicate north side lighting recommendations. ) ) EXTERIOR ACCESSIBILITY Front: Windows consist of full length plate glass ranging from 10 to 15 feet in length. In addition,the basement windows are "rollout" design which are double locked on the inside. Ingress to the residence is through a solid oak door equipped with a t inch,single cyl inder,dead-bolt lock. Ingress is also achieved through sliding glass doors located at the master bedroom and the living room. Said doors are secured by clasp-hook lock and frame bolt. East: Windows at the basement level duplicate those at the front as well. lr1ilddition,a sliding window is located over the sink which is ap- proximately 12 feet from the ground. Ingress is gained through a sliding glass door at the kitchen,which is the upper level,and duplicates the design of the front sliding doors. Ingress is also achieved into the garage through a solid core door,equip- ped with a spring lock door knob. West: Windows cons ist of the same "roll-out type windows and are also double locked from the inside. There are no ingress points on the West side. North: The only windows on the North side of the residence are located on the West half of the North side,approximately 10 feet from the ground, and are 3 feet wide x 1 foot high of the identical "roll-out" design. CRITICAL: ingress is gained into the garage,which is connected to the res idence through open access. The garage has no doors. Said garage contains a variety of tools and recreation items. Ingress to the home is gained through an oak frame plate glass door,equipped with a 1 inch dead-bolt single cylinder lock. RECOMMENDATIONS Minimum: 1. Al I sliding glass doors and window should have wooden dowels available to place in the tracks for security,particularly during extended periods of unoccupancy. 2. Garage doors should be installed and proberly equipped with security devices to prevent open access to the garage. 3. The East door entrance of the garage should be equipped with a 1 inch single cyl inder dead-bolt lock. Optimum: 1. Garage to residence glass door should be replace with a solid core oak door with a single cyl inder, 1 inch throw,dead-bolt lock. 2. Trim lilac bushes on the west side to a height of 31 feet. ) ) CONCLUSION The residence surveyed employs some basic crime prevention hardware. But such measures are defeated by critical areas outlined in minimum recom- mendations. Sliding glass doors and windows should always be equipped with dowels in the tracks to defeat forced entry to windows. Most sliding windows and doors are not designed to prevent forced entry. The increase in lighting will serve to discourage any perpetrator from "caseing" the residence. It should be noted that the residence has been the victim of a burglary as a result of the lack of garage doors. It will continue to be a target of opportunity until such deliquencey is corrected. If the previously mentioned recommendations are employed,security of the residents,and their property will be considerably enhanced. Thereby hardening the residence as a target of opportunity. If there are any questions regarding these recommendations or techniques in applying such,don't hesitate to contact the crime prevention officer at the A.P.O. at 925-2025. . . -- Area and Bulk Reqll Requirement Dl R,30 L' ~ R,l5A (6) . (feet) ~. " i'~'1 ' AIi buildings except dwe1lings and ac- cessory buildings -20 II .~ ccessory buildings -5 All buildings except dwellings and ac- cessory buildings -20 Dwellings-IO Accessory buildings -5 Same as H- (7) Ma:dmum height (feet) Principal buildings -25 Accessory buildings -21 on front % of lot, 12 on rear Ih of lot 25 25 2ri (8) Minimum distance between principal and accessory build- ing (feet) 10 10 10 10 (9) Per cent of open space required for building site (per. centage) No No No No requirement requirement requirement requirernl . Same as R.6 No Same Il~ i requirement No No No No requirement requirement requirement requiri'IJl" Standard Allowable Sq. Fl. 80 sq. ft. for each additional 0-2,400 100 sq. ft. in lot area 28 sq. ft. for each additional _ 2,400-4,080 1O~ sq. ft. i,r;t Ipt area I 7 sq. ft. for each additional 4.080-4,500 100 sq. ft. in lot area 6 sq. ft. for each additional 4,500-6.5[)0 100 sq. ft. in lot area 2 sq. ft. for each additional 6,500 . 100 sq. ft. in lot area 1454 (10) External floor area ratio (11) Internal floor area ratio *Lot Size Single-Family Structures 0-3,000 3,0[)1-9,OOO 9,001-15,000 15,001-50,000 50,000+ Supp. No. 26 u.J! ".1 ~1 i I " I , 'I! L i I I [-' I I i , I I I , f~' , I OL.l \' .~ 1 i j , i I }'1' . '._n" J :.A-:/.t:. <-'//.' , , ----~ . ',i:" .' "" ( .-' r T , .' :-, '( - " t " - ~~ "" A --~ ..j 2.1", i I I I i "I 'I \ _ ~ P\/YV':\\ ~WQ) I ;.,^~ i :~, r- ./)., '-. ~ ' . ~.~~ '-" " I -, -1 ' ~ . " I ~ n........ '('I \}'/ .-- r,\'-" ~-' . ' c) t\,J ,-.. I:" n " L.. ", i,' ,- . u\KwuIU[~ O~ \~~~A~~ []\3~ - .-~:c. UJ~re~ i ~(Q)~W(fQ) @[f ~IDJOSSUi0l)(~i(.. , I " ' ~ ~\fr<<WJlf~~~ ffW{. ~ 7J Fr.<3~N..~ ~~~~ lf~~lQ) ~~V[Q5~~ ~~Wi~~~~tf--- 1?1iT\ ~n0n ~~ ^- t?'fO\f0ri!?\\fO)lr~} fir\trlr0\\ n n -r u lJbl lbUu~ lh~~&' Ifa \b U:J~lf\~lr\ u' ~ u U~~ u #~ l1s /1. 114, ~rJi~(t}~ ~@~ ~ ro~1Jd W ~u~~M~. tllU@U\!J. ~~4\a (@~~~a.ue1o@~ [fS ~: _--. " ,1;' ,.' . . .. ~~~\\~ ~nf'(\~n~!\n' !J~f7\\0~~r~~() Ir7?i'a ,n" .' U\Al>>IJ\J~.\\ h(ll:,=, U ~iL".\lh.l ;;:t0J.i1lULl~?d\J U &~y ~'tl~~ rm~~~~ ~(~~~@~~~~W~ Uff&~~0j[J{S -. !Rl!l.\ED) J~C~[ ,f&5b ~Cfr:IQ b ~~ ~E (S~~~ ~V1f~ ~ro ~.~~@~tl [t~D~~~,O(@ M;Y:~~ ~~lre"'f. J@~ ~ IA 100 ~~~~ ~~~~mr ~mltt~uu~N ~~ fNJ~~ ~f~ w~LL~JWT~~~JlmV oa ------"--_.._-;-----'--'--., .' ,\ ' , ' ',' ," " fJ@i}fj (Au tJ~ ~U\fU~2) ~~U ~W~ ~ (Cory ~L5J~~l1~~~~~~~~~tI\D ~W~OOQc;9g: w .~ ~_ . ". ____ _ ..__.____ r .-"""" ... -- AFFIDAVIT STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. ) COUNTY OF PITKIN COMES NOW Dale Potvin who, first being duly sworn, deposes and says that on Friday, July 3, 1987, he posted the attached sign giving notice of the hearing before the Board of Adjustment at 4:00 p.m. Thursday, July 16, 1987, and that such sign complied with the requirements of the Aspen City Code and that such sign remained posted until just prior to the beginning of the hearing on July 16, 1987. Subscribed and sworn to me July 16, 1987, by DALE POTVIN. My connnission expires a-(t( - 31 Witness my hand and official ~~ I ~" . .' ~ t' f\\~ ~\o~ Number Label Address 10341 Jack Barker P. O. Box 3379 Aspen CO 81612 WEnd ~~ 'f ~' .~ ~ , ._"....~."_,..__._,......."...,.".."<,._~~''''_'.M~'_.__.,._,..'''''~"'..,., .....,-.-' lcj;-i"~ ') ~. PROOF REPORT June 11. 1987 &b' I Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. Lot K I L . M e,loc\( 43 User Fields u~~ 1 : 2: 3: Barker local 10346 1:/ Mr /Ms : Ms. 1 : local Jeannie A. Bascom Phone: 2: 215 West Ha Ilam Date : 00/00/00 3 : Aspen CO 81611 Title: Ms. Bascom All of WEnd E IID.1l1o n. of Lot E I f tlIcd< '50 10344 Esther Benninghoff 233 West Ha I I am Aspen CO 81611 WEnd ) Mr /Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Ms. Benninghoff Lot A If>. c.. ~l Dei<. 5''0 1 1: loca I 2: 3: I Number 10333 10334 10327 10343 _r.-<-',__".........-__<__v.--"""~,...,". . ~ Label Address Alison Bradford 307 West Francis Aspen CO 81611 WEnd John W. Buchanan 137 Moore Road Woodside CA 94067 WEnd Jessica Catto 7718 Georgetown Pike McClean VA 22102 WEnd C. M. P. O. Aspen WEnd Clark Box 566 CO 81612 i I J 1 PROOF REPORT June 11, 1987 Mr/Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Ms. Bradford Lo~ F '\- G. PJ lcck 4 z. Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. LuT It ~ L r3loc.k 4"'2. ~ Mr/Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Ms. Catto R\\. 0+ l~t- f 't G west ilL- uf ~ ~\oc..\:. 3(,:. Mr /Ms: Mr. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. Clark Lot R \5 blccK B Lc+ K I L t?>(DC~.!)LJ 2 User Fields 1: local 2: 3: 1 : 2 : 3 : Buchanan 1 : 2: 3: 1: loca I 2: 3: I Number 10356 10329 10350 10330 1 n'""~ , v.j/'"t ..-...._<_.'"i'--"~.'_._."'""'....._,, -_.~ PROOF REPORT June 11, 1987 Label Address WI I I lam L. comcowlch1 P. O. Box 1187 Aspen CO 81612 WEnd Thamor Company, 401 West Bleeker Aspen CO 81611 WEnd \ Daly Construction 200 West Bleeker Aspen CO 81611 WEnd ID Carinthia P.O. Box Aspen CO WEnd d Corporation 941 81612 \1..1 Thamor Corporation c/o Mauley Thalor 212 1300 N. Federal Highway Boca Raton FL 33432 WEnd Mr /Ms: Mr. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. Comcowlch i..o~ N ,\-() tOloc.-"- "3'1 Mr /Ms : Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Sir ~()st ill.. ",f 1..,,+ <':i l\\\ of t-\ -I-- L ~lock 3'1 Mr/Ms: Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Sir f: 10 / l) -{ P Pol\ of Q.. I ~ '\- S P.>loc\<. 5'V Mr /Ms : Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Sir Lot P/Q,~,5 ~1'i)c.l:. '3'1 Mr /Ms : Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: k 4- '/-z. L Bltek il-l./ 3 ~ ..........' .. ,-"~",,,.~,",,'.""'-'. User Fields 1: loca I 2: 3: 1: loca I 2: 3: 1: loca I 2: 3: 1: loca I 2 : 3: 1 : 2: 3: I .-...._."',......,"'~~.-,......--.~ ..._",.......,...~--.,-,""'_.,.""-:"'-..-.,, "l PROOF REPORT June 11. 1987 Number Label Address User Fields 10379 Diane Craig \.'7 Mr /Ms: 1 : Edrenea French Phone: 2: P. O. Box 3202 Date : 00/00/00 3: Long Beach CA 90803 Title: W End L-,o+ 1), ~Ioc\c. 5'1 10352 D"'t-a-n ,::a E. Craig I Mr/Ms: Ms. 1 : Ms. Edrent:::a .A. F'rench Phone: 2: P . O. Box 3202 --.. Date 00/00/00 3: : Long Beach CA 90803 Title: Ms. Craig and Ms. French W End ~ Nlsholas Dewolf 233 West Bleeker Aspen CO 81611 WEnd !~ Mr /Ms: Mr. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. Dewolf 1: loca I 2: 3 : 10351 ~Qt f1, e, oj.. c. ~lDC\< SI 4 .- Number 10380 10376 10381 10347 .' ,__~.'__'~"'-_~_'~_ _r.."__.......____.,--~._........._.__._~~.__...".....__,"''''... ,.,,' ""1 PROOF REPORT June 11, 1987 Label Address / ( ) B. Fasching 232 West Main Street Aspen CO 81611 WEnd LeRoy Fink 1\0 Mr. and Mrs. James Gorman\ 915 St. Louis Street Edwardsvl I Ie IL 62025 WEnd Nelson Fox P. O. Box 2425 Aspen CO 81612 WEnd \\ Anthony L. Greenberg 41 Market Street Venice CA 90291 WEnd (~ User Fields Mr /Ms : 1: I oca I Phone: 2: Date: DO/DO/DO 3: Title: l u+ 1< ,L I r'rJ c:j. ~ '/z of N I 61 k ~I Mr /Ms: Mr. 1 : Phone: 2: Date: DO/DO/DO 3: Title: Lei- Q I-R,S p'>l"c.k. ~q Mr /Ms : Phone: Date : DO/DO/DO Title: Lot R IS/ 8(uJ: 35 J\)or\-h I\'t.-- 1: loca I 2: 3: Mr/Ms: Mr. Phone: Date : DO/DO/DO Title: Mr. Greenberg Lo + " ~ \ ~ , .r l~ lvc'" _':>"'0 1 : 2: 3 : 5 I Number 10348 10355 Label Address Bert B. Holmes \t\ P.O. Box 35287 , Tulsa OK 74153 WEnd Beck Investors, Ltd 0.P P.O. Box 1108 Victorville CA 92392 WEnd ~-:----_.__....< . ~~-,,,.,....~,,,~.,,,._<.,~.^<-,, '~.,.",.....-...... PROOF REPORT June 11. 1987 User Fields Mr/Ms: Mr. 1: Phone: 2: Date: 00/00/00 3: Title: Mr. Holmes Lo-\- I'rI <>l- vJ z.o' of L.ot IV () loc.k 50 Mr /Ms: Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Gentlemen Lo+ K \ L, M Noel( 3'1 1 : 2: 3: 6 I Number 10326 10340 10382 10353 _____..____....._____,~..._""__,.'i.'.,,_,>".~,..._ "..04,'.:.',':...",.'__ '.,,~ PROOF REPORT June 11, 1987 Label Address User Fields Frank E. Jenk I nson 2/ \ 403 W. Hal lam Street Aspen CO 81611 WEnd Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. 1: local Phone: 2: Date: 00/00/00 3: Title: Mr. and Mrs. Jenkinson E ,/-t, of l..llt 14 I 1111 of' I, elk % Vivienne E. Jones Mr. Andrew Doremus P.O. Box 317 Aspen CO 81612 WEnd 1,11 1: loca I 2: 3: Mr. Doremus Mr/Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Ms. Jones and ~lr F.ft ,H,T elock. 4-3 1;'7 Mr /Ms : Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: lo~ 5'/1.. of K ~S r:,ioc.k 35 1: loca I 2: 3: Mary H. Kalmes 404 West Halam Street Aspen CO 81611 W -gnd John Kerrigan 5907 Yrwel I Drive Houston TX 77096 WEnd 1/~ 1 : 2: 3: Kerrigan Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. 1..0+ IT I B I c. [)[cc..l 3~ t.JOftI\U\1{ '70'9 T 7 I Number 10378 10349 __ ____" ___'~",:","~~''"''''''''''N~'_'"'~''_''''''''''_- ~--.""""""""_............,..,....,.--,,,-.,....-,---_.-.. ""~-"---'y ._, ,.., ~""'~".":'-' I' ...., PROOF REPORT June 11, 1987 Label Address Fe I I ca Lee 302 North Aspen CO WEnd < 2nd St :btet 81611 rvlo Barry Lefkowitz Mr, Geroge Vlcenzl 300 S', Spri n'j S+ A-~pe.... Co 31\0\1 WEnd User Fields Mr/Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: L.)\- 1<. L I l^f\ J B (cJ:.. il9 1: loca I 2: 3: Mr /Ms: Mr. 1: I oca I Phone: 2: Date: 00/00/00 3: Title: Mr. Lefkowitz and Mr. Vlcenzl I: 10' NO. uJ 20' cf ? . Aloe\:.. 50 8 I Number 10342 10335 _,_..~_.___A'''4~__''''''_''''''-''''''''''"_ "',....,rc....-'~ . ~ -~,'""..._-._<_., Label Address PROOF REPORT June 11. 1987 vl John S. Llzzo c/o LaSal Ie Comm. Brokerage 200 N. Michigan Avenue Suite 6 Chicago IL 60601 WEnd Frank E. Marta Mr. Peters Chalkovska ItPq W S"'~~:) I........ 'fin PC-VI I CO WEnd 1,,1 Mr /Ms: Mr. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. Llzzo l..ot- PI q ~ leek. 43 Mr/Ms: Mr. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. Marta and /..()\- "", I.- ,(VI. e, I oc.~ LI-'l- 9 User Fields 1 : 2: 3: 1 : 2: 3: Mr. Chaikovska I Number 10339 Label Address Sharon M. Prior ~c, P.O. Box 656 ( Aspen CO 81612 WEnd -~"---'''''''-'-'-''-'- PROOF REPORT June 11. 1987 Mr /Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Ms. Prior La \- \) -+ ~ l2>\oc-t 43 10 - .,,.,,,.-.,....,,......_',. "".~' ~" User Fields 1: loca I 2: 3: I Number 10337 10375 10338 10331 ______________,_..__'"__,.__,..,__...L..__.-.,..____~__.'''''''''''__~..........--.~,__,~,..,,,."'_~ Label Address Theodore S. Ryan P.O. Box 171 6 Lakevl I Ie CT 06039 WEnd 3d Commerce Savings & Loan II \ So kc.\c.<\ .../ Suite 1350 './ San Antonio TX 78205 WEnd s:.l r <q e~ ~~ Marguerite M. Scheid Estate of 1171 Morada Place Altadava CA 91001 WEnd Helmut J. Schloffer P. O. Box 941 Aspen CO 81612 WEnd ?-"'V' ~7 PROOF REPORT June II, 1987 Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. L-o-t Q ,R IS ~loc.\(. 'H... Mr/Ms: Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: f 1/1.. ~-F L i-M Mr/Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: /.-0+ A I 5,C. 131 cc,\c 43 Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. User Fields 1 : 2: 3: Ryan 1 : 2: 3: f) I cc.k If If I 1 : 2 : 3: 1: loca I 2: 3: Schloffer J..o+ /\0\- ~ i 8/oc.\( fl.. 11 1 Number 10332 10372 10354 10377 Label Address Frank Shafroth 288 Clayton Street Su I te 303 Denver CO 80206 WEnd ~~ John Strandberg 2510 Grand Avenue Apartment 2403 Kansas MS 64018 WEnd I )'J John J. Strandber 2510 Grand Ave e Apartment , 3--403 Ka~~~s~~y MO 64108 W/ E I I sha Svea Estate of- 7;J\P PROOF REPORT June 11. 1987 Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. L~!rs C.D,E 13 ('ll,,1< It J... _._,_c,._......"__.._._.~.._. User Fields 1 : 2: 3: Shafroth Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: John and Jane All of 10+ ABeD \.Ue<.t 'h cf Lot f .8Icd<.:$Cf ~,,~~ "t. cF- 1-0+ G F l.0i1!. ~ Mr/Ms: Mr, and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. Mr/Ms: Phone: 12 1 : 2: 3 : 1 : 2: 3: Strandberg 1: loca I 2: I ,_ Number 10336 10345 10328 . ".. ~ "--~._~~_.."--_.,"_.~- ..--,.~,.~...,."....- __,~_,,_,,/_,___~_'__~_'Co.., - PROOF REPORT June 11, 1987 Label Address 315 East Main Street Aspen CO 81611 WEnd Josef Uhl 320 W. Ha I I am Aspen CO 81611 WEnd '31 Stephen A. Wakefield 34~2 Meadow Lake Lane 1 J Houston TX 77027 WEnd , John F. Weaver, Jr. ~1 442 West Bleeker Street Aspen CO 81611 WEnd User Fields Date: 00/00/00 3: Title: L.D \-:, N, O,? 16(.,J.. 1/, Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Mr. and Mrs. Uhl 1-0+ N I 0 I P r?>lcc..-I<... lJ.L 1: loca I 2: 3: Mr /Ms: Mr. 1 : Phone: 2: Date: 00/00/00 3: Title: Mr. Wakefield ~ j? 2.3,310 F-t, of k-+ D ,1)1cc.k. 50 W 13.5<1 F+, /...ct t; Mr/Ms: Mr. and Mrs. 1: local Phone: 2: Date: 00/00/00 3: Title: Mr. and Mrs. Weaver Ld i'., v",,:cr Sub ,t)loc.X ~(., Uf\' I- I , L r I O^,,-<:,-( P"r K (o",c\o 13 L Number 10373 '" -,~."~_..~...",--..,.......- --------~........._"-_._....,..,--=-"'..,....,.--_.,~~.=~............, Label Address Ruth Whyte P. O. Box 202 Aspen CO 81612 -' WEnd , PROOF REPORT June 11. 1987 ~t Mr/Ms: Ms. Phone: Date : 00/00/00 Title: Ms. Whyte La-\- 1\ ,&,C I B lccl:. 4-~ OE r ~ If r: 14 User Fields 1: local 2: 3: (' (, l ~ !''''~'', '......", BOARD' QF 'ADJUS'l'MENTS RECORD -6FPROCEEDINGS AUGUST'13. 1987 Chairman Remo Lavagnino called the meeting to order at 4:10 pm. ROLL -cALL Answering roll call were Charlie Paterson, Josephine Mann, Rick Head and Ron Erickson. Francis Whitaker and Anne Austin were excused. MINUTES' QFJULY-2 .-' 1987 Ron Erickson made a motion to approve the minutes of July 2, 1987. Charlie Paterson seconded the motion with all in favor. MINUTES-OF-JULY 16.--1987 Dale Potvin, I listened to There was a question as to whether the applicant, had said "zoning" in his presentation on page 2. the tape and he did use the word "zoning". After 2 corrections Rick Head made a motion to approve the minutes of July 16, 1987. Charlie Paterson seconded the motion with all in favor. CASE- '81-10 'TODDy WYNNE Property is located in the R-30 zoning category. Side yard setback is 10 ft. Sec. 24-3.7 Area and Bulk requirements. Applicant appears to be requesting to encroach with an attached garage 1 & 1/2 to 3 ft into the northerly side setback. Harry Mayer representing Toddy Wynne: Affidavit and posting were both presented to the Board. There is two homes right there that used to be a subdivision called the Quillen Subdivision. There is an empty lot on the corner. By the map you can see the neighbor's house with a former property line. And now that new property line. It was done by the previous owner of both homes and lots and was done over the head of the City. It was taken to Denver to a higher court and they made them allow. The City did not want to allow this split. Remo: ". This was a lot split? I c ( l c ,......, . Harry Mayer: No, it was a change of a lot. Ron: Re-alignment of a lot line. Rick: A lot line adjustment. Har ry: Lot line adj ustment. The reason being it was a non- conforming house. They needed more space to do their addition and they wouldn't let them. They sued the City. They sued every neighbor. Rick Head: There was also a covenant in the subdivision that prevented this as well. This was in the early 80s. Remo: Why did it not come as a matter of procedure to this Board? Rick: It was a battl e with Council I bel ieve and the City attorney. Harry: So that is how that line got moved over. As you see the square footage right now the Lot A which is not the lot we are dealing with is a larger lot now, 31,776. Wynne's lot is 30,000. It could have been evenly distr ibuted and would have solved my problem here. I have corne up with a few other al ternatives if this doesn't happen. One is possibly for Wynne purchasing 2 or 3 feet of the neighbor's property. We need 10 feet. I have talked with the neighbor who has Lot l2A and he understands my problem. He didn't mind it at all. Practical difficulties: I am not sure of the wording whether that means practical sense or if that is one of the only solutions, or reasonable. The way the house is situated, as you face the house and you look at the left side, there a lot of trees. Presently I understand there is no driveway but it could be put in. I am not saying that it is not impossible to put a garage on the other side. I could be. There is room in the yard to put it with setbacks. Charlie: You are saying you would lose trees on that side. Harry: You would lose trees, whereas on the other side I would lose a half-dead Aspen and one other Aspen. I feel the owners were somewhat misrepresented when they bought their lot. There is a big burm between the homes where it looks like that is my yard and that is your yard. I know when I purchase property I would get that marked and all the corners marked before. There was supposed to be a certified survey. I know it was the owner's fault for not doing it but if you would 'look at the property, there is a burm so that the stake east of 2 the burm is the lot line. ( Then by the code "The applicant must present facts to prove such difficulties and hardships. The Board rarely finds practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships where applicants appeal as a matter of aesthetics or design or economics where a reasonable legal alternative is available." It is not reasonable to put it on into so many problems with trees. this town, it is another meeting. the other side. I have run To get a tree taken down in Remo: If we grant a permit to build something that has a 7 inch diameter tree in the middle of it, which takes precedent over it- our variance or the tree? We will have to get an opinion on that. Rick: There doesn't necessar ily have to be a garage on either the east or west side, it could go in the back. You could have a driveway that goes right around in the back. That is all flat and buildable. I know it is taking up nice yard space. ( Harry: It could. rest of the way. Josephine: Are the owners feeling they really need an attached garage? I agree there is a lot--It is a huge lot the Har ry: It is attached to the house but it does not house. They go outside a little bit under an overhang. no direct access to the house from the garage. enter the There is Then the code says "The following shall be considered valid reasons for granting a variance: That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant." That is the lot line. Then "The granting of the variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right enjoyed by other the properties in the same vicinity and zone." As I drove down the next house on the left you see a garage on one side and a garage on the other. I could not find a property line. I don't know if they are encroaching or not. As I drive through the neighborhood everyone else is able to enjoy a garage. Remo: We are not denying you that property right. You could still get a garage on this property. Perhaps not where you particularly want it. If this were a lot where it was really small and there was no other place to put this then you might have a case, plus the fact that the garage is not a necessity. It is an amenity according to the code. , l 3 ,..... ~ . Harry: I know this is not a great argument but this ( misrepresenting--if you look at the way the driveway comes in-- Ron: But you have other recourse on that. misrepresentation, or the former owner. Sue the realtor for Harry: To put it behind the house, I would have objections from the neighbor next door. Their living area is located in such a way that this would be quite an obstruction. Remo: But you would be allowed to put it there. Maybe that is a good point for them to give you the extra 3 feet here on the side as far as the alternative. Rick: It is an adjustment I doubt you will ever get. It was litigation to the Supreme Court of Colorado on this whole thing. Remo: Only because the City objected to it. Harry: It is only a matter of 500 sq ft to give away. It is not even the whole lot line. As far as space, I could see a problem if this were close to a neighbor encroaching into the setback but there is a lot of room between. Remo: The lot line change was done under a single ownership, is that right? ( Harry: Yes. There is a third undeveloped lot. This is the only line that was changed. The original owner no longer owns any of the three lots. It is not listed as Red Butte Subdivision or Black Birch. Red Butte is an R-30. 300 feet down the street is an R-15 where you have 5 ft setback. Rick: He has created a new subdivision. That is why he was mired in this battle because he tried to take 2 lots and turn them into 3 lots. He had the density to do that but the subdivision had covenants against it and the City took the posture that it could not be done. He fought it to the Supreme Court and prevailed. He had enough land on the two lots to turn it into three lots. But that has no bearing on our consideration. Remo: What is the mInImum width of the garage, you have a 9 ft width garage door and you have 13 feet-- Harry: There is a wall there. It is a solid wall going up. Even if I take that off, I am still in the setbacks. Remo: You are getting rid of yard setback. It would just probably be about 1 foot. , 2 feet. You wouldn't have the rear be the front corner and it would l 4 . 1"""" ,- <""" - ( Harry: At my own house I have a 10 ft wide garage and I have a Subaru. You can go in and just get out of the doors. It is only 13 feet. I have given him actually 11 ft inside to make it able to get the car door open against that one wall. Rick: I hate to get into these kind of things of redesigning his house but I can see other ways of resolving this problem without having to grant a variance. They have already given you an easement, the burm runs along here anyway. Maybe they will give you another easement to let you drive in. Harry: You get into big trees there. There are 4 trees at least to cut out to come in any other way to the garage on this side. The neighbor was a little upset at first. I said we are going to match the siding, roof and windows. It is going to look like it has always been there if I am allowed to do it. ( Remo asked if there were any other questions. There were none and he closed the public portion of the meeting. All Board members complimented Harry on his presentation. Rick: I do not see a hardship demonstrated here. We have seen this garage question time and time again. There are a number of other possibilities for putting a detached garage elsewhere on the property that would not require us to grant a variance. There have been numerable problems with respect to the neighbors - in the Red Butte Subdivision on these properties historically and I think we are opening up another can of worms if we grant variance on this. I prefer to wait till the applicant appeals to Council for relief by way of a lot line adjustment. Ron: There are other alternatives as I see it to get this done. We have identified certain areas where you could get help from the neighbors. Josephine: This is one of the cases that we run into from time to time where there is lots of space but not in the right position or not accessible. But there is not a strong enough case here for us to grant a variance. Charlie: First of all I consider this a minimal request. Second, I really consider it a hardship when the lot line is changed after a house has been built. Remo: But not after the purchaser bought it. l Charlie: The point being, if that property line was there when the house was built, the house would have been built down another 15 or 20 feet. And because the house was put there, I consider this a hardship. It is another case where there seems to be plenty of land but the location of the garage anywhere else does 5 ( ( l , ""' - not make a lot of sense. Th is is the only pi ace for thi s particular house that this location makes any sense. First of all the driveway location, second the window location on the other end of the house where the living room is and third, access to the back of the house would be quite difficult. I would be in favor of granting this variance. Remo: I think the applicant has the dubious honor of giving one of the best presentations and being shot down in flames by not being granted the variance. But I don't think all the avenues have been exhausted. One of them, if he had come to us and said I spoke to the owner of Lot 12A and he is adamant about not giving me 1 or 2 feet--that is an avenue that has not been explored, an avenue we don't have information on. If anything, the owner might be amenable to giving him a foot or whatever is required because he doesn't want to see the garage behind the house. And there are alternatives within the framework of the lot itself so I would be against granting this variance. Rick made a motion to deny request for variance on Case 87-10. Ron seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Ron Erickson, yes, Rick Head, yes, Josephine Mann, yes, Charlie Paterson, no, Remo Lavagnino. Charlie made a motion to adjourn. Rick seconded the motion with all in favor. The time was 4:50 pm. -_Lb,4a~)Ji_&ufb/::2_____ Jani/e M. carne;(~City Dep~y Clerk , 6 (f (' ( \-- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS- JULY 16. 1987 Chairman Remo Lavagnino called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Rick Head, Charlie Paterson, Francis Whitaker and Ron Erickson. Josephine Mann and Anne Austin were both excused. MINUTES OF JULY 2. 1987 After discussion pertaining to corrections on these minutes Francis made a motion to table approval of the minutes until clerk has time to make proper corrections. Ron Erickson seconded the motion with all in favor. CASE 187-9 I-DALE & SALLY POTVIN Property is in the R-6 zoning category. Rear yard setback is 15 ft. Actual carport setback appears to be 7' 4" and therefor encroaching into rear yard setback. Section 24-l3.3(a) no such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or attached in a way - which increases its nonconformity. Applicant appears to be asking to complete the conversion of the carport to a garage in the rear yard setback. Applicant presented affidavit and sign of posting of notification of application for variance. Joe Edwards, representing Dale & Sally Potvin: Essentially, Dale wants to put a garage door on the back of what has been, for 25 years, a carport. I am going to let him recite for you the history of how this building got to where it is today. That will give you that perspective and then I will make some technical arguments. Dale Potvin: I purchased the house in about 1980. The house was built in 1962. Originally it was a house and a carport and then some time in 1970 a bedroom was added on. Joe: This is a 1970 improvement survey that shows at that time when they were making this addition on the side that the carport was existing and had been built at the time. Remo: And it is in the same condition that it is now? Joe: Except that we want to close off the back. I ,~..' " ~' Remo: I mean everything else was enclosed except for the door? Joe: Right. It is 7'4" from the back line. Bill Drueding: This survey shows a carport overhang of this thing here and a loop overhang here that does not show any connection. These two are connected now. Joe: That is correct. We are going to address that. There was an overhanging roof and they were not connected. Remo: Are they connected now? Joe: Yes, they are. Remo: When were they connected? Joe: He is going to tell you when that happened. Dale: This was a separate and independent carport and as an accessory building it can be within 5' of the rear yard setback in R-6 so this conformed to zoning assuming zoning was the same 25 years ago. Remo: Then it was not connected, is that right? ( Bill: It conformed in the rear but it was non-conforming in that separation. l Joe: who knows whether that was required 25 years ago. Dale: I bought the house after living here for a couple of years. In 1982 I was able to do some remodeling on it. It was in need of a new roof and in the process of getting a zoning permit to do an extensive remodel, I put a new roof on the house. My building permit to remodel allowed me to enclose kind of a hallway portion that you see on that survey between the carport and the existing house. It made that into a bedroom of sorts from the carport which required an extension of the roof. The 6" gap in the overhang was a natural collection point for bl~wing and melting snow which would dam up and create ice in that area. I reviewed that with the roofers and we decided to enclose the 6" gap. It seemed an obvious thing to do to stop the problem that we were having as far as ice and snow build up. That is effectively how the house became non-conforming from an accessory building to attached garage. Remo: Did you do this in conformance with your building permit? Dale: Yes. 2 ~' "-..,/ f", -- (' Remo: Your permit allowed you to do this? Dale: Yes. I had a building permit to basically do all this remodeling to enclose this area and-- Remo: To connect the two buildings. Dale: And to add that connection between the hallway and then in the process of doing that I was in need of a new roof and so actually I put a roof on it and that was a disaster. The next summer I had to redo that and in that period made that connection. I initially did it one way and then I re-did it but effectively with that '82 permit I connected it. At that point the house was 22 years old. The roof was obviously in need of repair and I had a permit for that hallway and it was all part of the existing roof. It was an obvious safety hazard because of melting and ice build up and so it was enclosed at that point with a tar and gravel roof. ( Rick Head: If we are talking about a non-conforming structure because of the proximity of the carport to the house, why would the building inspector give approval on the permit to expand the non-conforming use? A variance would be needed. I don't see how the building inspector would have the authority to grant a permit on something that is already non-conforming and further expanding on the non-conforming. Dale: That was a hallway. Remo: I think it was an oversight. Joe: Technically they weren't moving the footer and the thing had been there since '62 and Remo: It is a point that he wanted to make. Rick: time. Because Bill is sitting here and he was around at the Perhaps he could shed some light on what happened. Francis: Could I ask for the chronology--the house was built in '62. The addition was in 1970? Dale: Cor rect. Francis: And then you went further in 1984? Dale: '82. Francis: correct? '82. In 1982 you closed the roofs in. Is that \...' 3 ,...., ....../ ..., -' Dale: Yes. (' Ron: What is closing the roofs in? Joe: They were overhanging and they put a little connecter between them to keep the snow from blowing in under the back door. Dale: I have just kind of put a grade so it kind of slopes from the garage on to the master bedroom rather than have that overhang. At that time I had no knowledge that there was any between an accessory building or an attached garage. that connection I just felt like it was an obvious didn't realize that maybe it was something that would carport non-conforming. distinction In making thing. I make that ( At that point when I bought the house there was a wall on the total east side of the garage. And its shed already in place. Joe: This is a picture taken right here looking along the sidewall so that you can just barely see the sidewall. This sidewall was in place on the existing carport and the guy had built-in storage cabinets on the inside of it. That was that way when Dale bought it. Remo: He bought in 1962? Joe: like this just No, he bought in '80. When he bought it, that was already closed in so it wasn't like a carport with 4 poles. It had wall, effectively had 3 sides, this side was not closed in, this side. Dale: When I re-sided the house, I re-sided that portion of it and so it now has vertical siding just at the horizontal side that was on it. In the last 2 years, I have had 2 thefts out of my carport, both of which aggravated me tremendously. In the first theft, I lost approximately $700.00 worth of tools and sports equipment. The other theft was a pair of skis which was just this last winter. After the second theft I was determined to close in the garage because of the irritation that this created for me. At this point I started enclosing a portion of it which would be the westerly portion. Joe will show you where that is . Joe: This adding the the back. little section here about 10 or 12 feet. Dale started wall to there with the intention of putting a door on l 4 c ( (. Remo: This was existing? Dale: Yes. Joe: Well, yea, this is sort of like the side of the addition. Ron: That was in the Fall of '82? Joe: No, this was after in '86. Remo: You got a permit for that? Bill: No. Joe: No. That is why we are here. This he started adding in '86 and go ahead, Dale. Dale: That was done during the summer. Later in the summer I Joe: Here is a picture of what it looks like today. He added this section. And he added around the corner these sections here and here. This part was already there. Bill: And did you re-do this wall here, Dale? Dale: That was done in '82 when I entirely remodeled the house. I actually had done a portion, there was celotex on a portion of it since ' 82. I didn't real ize that it should have required a permit. I did get a permit to move the electrical because the electrical box was in the carport. I also got a permit to move my gas meter out which was also inside the carport. But basically it was a non-structural addition. I probably should have got a permit. I was incorrect in not doing that. I wasn't changing the footprint. The posts that supported the garage are kind of a natural parameter to enclose it and that is basically what I was attempting to do. At that point while I was getting the permit, I was red tagged and stopped construction and have since come forward and applied for this application. Remo: When you got the permit to put in the garage door, you got red tagged? Dale: When I got the permit to change the electrical meter and gas meter. Remo: You got red tagged then? Bill: That's what made us aware that something was going on there. Joe: They then went by and checked it because he pulled those permits and they saw that he put on this wall and gone around the 5 c ( l corner and was about to put on the garage door. They gave him this red tag asking that he do 3 things. He would need a 1 hour fire wall between the house and the garage. And you need a 1 and 3/8 solid core door here on the back and you need a survey to determine the proximity. So then this spring he filed a building permit to do those things. Under the application is a building permit and he was asking for the I hour fire wall, the placement of the glass door, a protective metal post and gas meter and to put in the overhead door from the carport. That was rejected and referred to this board for the reasons of a setback. Dale: That gives you an idea of what I am attempting to do. To enclose within the existing footprint a carport. And I am asking for a variance to do it for reasons of secur ity. I have al ready had 2 thefts out of there and I feel like it is a very reasonable request. I have talked to all the property owners on the block. There are 6 other property owners. All of the other property owners enjoy the privilege of encroaching either into the rear yard setback or actually into the alley. So it is something that other property owners, over a time, have been able to do. I have talked to them each individually. I have a letter from each of the property owners on the block. They support my request and have all signed the letter. I typed up a form letter just to make it easier. I did review and give each person updated comment on all these points. They understand what I am doing. I have given them a copy of my application and reviewed it with them in detail. They are aware that I am just enclosing an existing garage within my property line but I need a variance. They feel the more security there is in the alley, the safer everybody's property will be. They also feel that aesthetically they would rather drive by and see a closed garage door than look at all the things that one collects and stores in a carport or garage. Joe: Here are those letters for the record and here are a series of photographs that the Board members may want to examine that show the condition of the alley and show the other encroachments. You can see that these other buildings are a good deal closer to the alley than Dale 's. All the ones on the north side are actually in the platted alleyway and this is a full residence which is within a few feet of the platted alleyway. I don't know how he got that unless he got a variance. And this is a detached structure which is in a few feet of it. Dale's is set back 7 & 1/2 ft. So every single property owner on the whole block has more of an encroachment than Dale does and they all have closed doors. Dale: The last point is that this spring the City of Aspen Police Department asked me to close my garage door because they 6 (' ( '- " . " , ~ thought it was very much an obvious invitation for someone to steal. We discussed the problem they have had in the alleys in the west end with people stealing from those areas. I have since had them do a security report on my house. I have a written report from them with their minimum recommendation being that a garage door be installed and properly equipped with a security device. I have been victimized by burglary. It is an obvious target and is deficient and should be corrected. I certainly have the support of the Police Department in recommending that it be enclosed for security reasons. Joe: With respect to the code compliance part of the presentation I note that for some reason that defies logic, buildings on lots which are 2 and 1/2 times the size of this one, can have the principal dwelling only 10 feet from the back property line. Yet principal buildings in smaller R-6 zone are supposed to be 15 ft. It doesn't make a lot of sense but that is the way it is. Bill: The R-6 zone has streets and they have allowed don't have alleys. that. alleys. The subdivisions That is the reason for Joe: Also for accessory buildings, which in this case would include detached garages, can be 5 ft and I am not sure there is a lot of logical reason why you can say that it is more impractical to have a detached garage at 5 ft and yet an attached garage has to be 15 ft. What is the difference on the impact of the neighborhood? Bill: It is a safety factor. They want a 10 ft separation so they can get fire equipment in there. When you attach the garage to the house, they don't require the 10 ft but they require a 1 hour separation. That is a safety more than a visual effect. Joe: At any rate we are here requesting under either of two theories. We could either just request a variance--just a flat out setback variance instead of 15 ft that we be given a 7'8" variance for the carport in place and allowed to go ahead and put the garage door on which is essentially all we want to do. The thing is there. It is not going away. It is not going to be torn down. And it is not going to be removed or anything so it isn't going anywhere. It seems like it is almost zero impact on anybody to put a garage door on it which will meet code. We will put in the fire wall. We will put in the solid core door. We will do everything that we are required to do as if it had been attached. We would just request that variance and I point out that compared to all the other properties on the block, we have more setback by substantial amount than anybody else. The second way this thing could be approved is by approval of an overhead door as being a non-structural addition to an existing 7 ,,,,"""' /" / ,~ c non-conforming structure. This thing was made non-conforming when the overhanging roofs were connected to prevent the snow from blowing in. I don't think anybody real ized that that had the effect of switching this from a detached structure accessory building to part of the principal residence making it technically non-conforming. It has been that way since 1982 and we could approve it as a non-structural addition which doesn't increase the non-conformity of that existing non-conforming structure. ( You could, I suppose, take the position that it was Dale's fault that it became nonconforming. But it certainly wasn I t intentional and I think that no one noticed it. I think that provision allowing for existing non-conforming uses to be cleaned up, repaired, as long as they are not expanded is certainly within the intent of this thing. I think the standards of exceptional circumstances, the unnecessary hardship arises out of the fact that this is the most conforming of any on the block. It is an unnecessary hardship to say that he can't prevent thefts in this area by closing it off. All the neighbors think is a great idea. So we would respectfully request your consideration to, under either of those theories or both, grant Dale permission to complete this project and put his garage door on. Remo: First I want some clarification from Bill. That 1986 addition--that last one that he put the west wall and got red tagged--does that mean he would have to take that down? Bill: That was done that that be removed. to include that those without a permit and it could be required So any application for variance would have walls were done without a permit. Joe: Again, that is a non-structural wall. Remo: It doesn't matter. It was done without a permit and it is an illegal use. Actually it is not a carport now is it? It is a garage as it stands now. Just clear this point up. The structure, as it stands now, would you consider that a garage? Bill: In that it is surrounded by 4 walls, yea. Remo: It is a garage now. Bill: Yea. Francis: 4 walls? It is 3 walls closed off. Bill: garage not in The only one that is not closed off is the one where the door is to go. The wall has been extended but the door is there yet. l 8 ( ( l Remo: My next question is what constitutes a door? Is 8 ft a door?, 4 ft?, 10 ft? So if they detach the main house from the garage and brought it back to its original status, they would not need a variance. If they just do separate roofs because that was a non-conforming use is between the 2 houses. That was existing. Bill: I have no proof that the connection between the roofs or the connection from the carport where the snow was blowing through--that connection I can find no proof that that was done. Remo: No, I am tal king about between the house--not the east wall--just the house and the garage. Charlie: You need 10 feet. Remo: Well, but OK, so that is a non-conforming use. It is a separate building now, it is not attached to the main house. We agreed that Bill: It was attached by wall also. Remo: Well, it wasn't. At one time it wasn't. Bill: But it is now. Remo: I know, I am try ing to establ ish that if he had not connected these two walls together, and they were separated, what would that carport be considered? An accessory building? or an attached, I mean it is not attached Bill: It would have still been an accessory building Remo: Right, requiring what? Bill: Requiring what to do with it. Remo: These setbacks--the rear yard setbacks. Bill: The rear yard setback would have been non-conforming as far as Remo: Between the buildings but that was existing so we can't do anything about that. But they would have been allowed to put this structure in. Bill: No, I didn't say that. Remo: I mean a carport would have been a legal use. Bill: The carport was a legal use. Remo: Right. So it is the enclosure that you are--the conversion 9 ( of increasing--but wait a minute now, the carport would have been a conforming use, it would have met setback requirements. Bill: It would have met the rear yard setback requirement. Remo: Isn't that the one that they are asking for? Bill: Yea. Remo: So that they could have built a garage. Bill: No. They couldn't have enclosed the area between the carport and the house because you need a 10 ft separation and they didn't have that. Remo: By adding the wall, they would have increased the non- conforming. Bill: Yea, you took your carport like this and then, you know, your wall here Remo: So that the fact that it didn't have a wall back there Bill: Right. Rick Head: You can't expand a non-conforming. ( Bill: Right. It was a carport and so there was no existing wall. There was a separation between there. In '82 the connection that was made. I can't prove that it was done either way. When you come to '86 what happened was the electrical and gas meter had to be taken outside. Permits are pulled separately wi thout getting a building permit. They were asked to be inspected. The Building Inspector went out there and said well that is fine but how did this other stuff happen? That is the time that he red tagged it in '86. He knew that we wouldn't have allowed that to become a garage because then it would require a I hour separation. He had a door which was not a proper door. He had been here long enough he knew it wasn't inspected. These walls, by Joe's admission and of yours, this wall here and these walls across there, were done without a permit. This one you can clearly see was done on purpose. Ron: Dale, how long have you been in real estate? Dale: I have been a broker for about 5 years. Ron: And in real estate in this town? Were you in real estate when you bought this house? ( Dale: years. No. Actually I was. I have been in real estate about 7 I would note that I did pull 2 permits that were needed 10 , -, ( in compliance with City codes. My intention was to do this by code. I could have easily put up a garage door and I admit I did enclose that without a permit which was incorrect. But I could easily put a garage door on and without a permit. Remo: Then you would not have been able to move those utilities outside. Dale: What I am saying is that I felt that it was a very minor issue. I felt like as long as utilities were outside, both gas and electrical, I was effectively complying with Joe: And he was wrong and he admits that. Rick Head: Wouldn't you say there were other issues like fire wall and glass door that justify permits? Dale: I will rectify all those issues as shown by my building permit. Bill: When did you apply for the garage door? After being red tagged? Dale: Yea, not until a month ago, 6 weeks ago. ( Joe: You were red tagged in the Fall. And he waited till this spring to get back into the construction business. Dale: There is a certain amount of frustration that a homeowner feels when things are stolen from you. A certain amount of feeling of invasion that I guess motivated me just to go ahead and get this done. Every time something is stolen I feel very frustrated and probably that frustration is what made me go ahead without first coming in to get a variance but Joe: Well, you didn't know a variance was necessary until you got red tagged, actually till you got the building permit. That is the first time the setback issue came up. Bill: There wasn't anything else to come in for. Dale: In retrospect I was incorrect in the procedure I followed but it is my intention to do it by code and I think that the security issue is a very strong one here. l Remo: I would like to address that since that is a strong argument. There is plenty of opportunity to secure whatever your possessions are. It is not incumbent on us to have that space provided for you especially in a non-conforming use. As I remember looking into that garage you have some utilities in the back. You have a kind of step up that sets back of where some type of bench or laundry or some other area. The cars don't go 11 ,...."- ",'# c to the wall. That portion could be secured. You could put some kind of locks or whatever it takes to secure it. If that is an insecure area then don't put your possessions out there. We can't really look at arguments of that nature in order to look at granting a variance. On another point, you talk about other people enjoying or infringing on the setback. Because others have more than you, does not give us cause to expand your non-conforming use. You also are enjoying something in the setback. Whether somebody is in the alley or not, I don't think it is a matter of degree to how much more you can ask for in a non-conforming way than other people are enjoying. Joe: In response to that I stuck that in there because I was reading out of section 2-22 paragraph D which says the following: Shall be considered a valid reason for granting a variance. (3) That the granting of a variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but denied to this property because of special conditions or extraordinary circumstances. Remo: But you are enjoying those. You are in the setback. Joe: The others all have their doors on and we don't. ( Remo: I don't think it was meant to expand those non-conforming uses. You are enjoying it--not to the degree that they are. That doesn't give us cause to grant you a variance. Joe: But expanding would be to enlarge. Remo: Expanding the use. It could be expanding the use too. Joe: We are not expanding it. footprint. It is wi thin exactly the same ~ Remo: You know, when I first saw this I said I can't believe that you are being denied a permit. I can't believe that you wouldn't be allowed an overhead door to be put in here. I almost had prejudice corning in here. I couldn't understand why we couldn't give him this variance. But now I realize that there is cause. When you are doing things illegally in the first place in order to get to the point where it looks like a garage, then we have a different set of criteria on which to base granting you a var iance or not. p,nd that has to be addressed. If that was an existing built structure the way it is now, I can hardly understand why you wouldn't be granted a variance. But I can see that a lot of things have happened that were not under the review of accountability to the Building Department. Joe: Dale has apologized for that. Are we going to penalize him 12 ( and not give him a variance the way you give everybody else because he did not realize he needed a building permit? Rick: First we gave him a variance for the garage door and the Building Department said you got to pullout those two walls that were added illegally. Bill: If you give him the variance for the door, you are giving him the variance for the walls. Then the Building Department, with your variance, can have him do the construction correctly. Rick: What position would the Building Dept take if we deny the garage door? Would you let him leave the walls that are presently there? Bill: I would have to talk to the City attorney. Joe: They would never act on a mandatory injunction to try to force somebody to remove that. That's silly. Remo: We had a whole roof removed. A roof that was up already on the Continental Inn. Charlie: But that was a very extreme situation. Remo: Well, it was something that we did that should be done. ~ Joe: He was doing it intentionally, right? He knew exactly what he was doing. He was deliberately violating it. He only got the permits that he knew he needed to get and he just didn't think a garage door required one. He was wrong. He was dead wrong. He should have had more consciousness about it. Do we want to continue to flail him because he made a mistake? Remo: I think what Ron might have been referring to, is that he is in the business of knowing things about it. Ron: I consider him an expert in this field. Remo: And all of a sudden to lose his memory about failing to realize that he needs a permit to put up any kind of structure-- anything you do around here. Joe: I deal with brokers every single day. Maybe they should know more than they do but they don't know beans about setbacks. I am always dealing with the problem of a lack of realtor's knowledge of the technical compliance with the codes. That's why we have lawyers. l Remo: But Dale has been before us on a lot split and we were talking about things of that nature. I can't believe that he is not familiar with that section of the code. However, given the 13 benefit of the doubt on that ~ Francis: I think it is pertinent to introduce something in this draft that has been prepared by the City Attorney about our duties and reasons. On page 5 paragraph 3: Self infliction or self created. Whether a hardship is a result of the applicant's own actions is a highly significant fact which is of material element bearing on the determination of the necessary hardship or practical difficulty and weighs heavily against an owner seeking variance. ( l This is a self-created hardship. some of it without a permit. Some of it with a permit and Joe: I think what they are referring to there would be something like if he had built the thing within the setback and then came in for the variance. But he was just merely trying to put a door on the back of something that has been there for 25 years. Francis: By connecting the garage to the house is what created the non-conformity. Joe: That's right. Not to anybody's intention or knowledge. Francis: Didn't you do that? Dale: Yea. 6 years ago. Francis: You created the non-conformity by your own actions. This is the point I am trying to make. Dale: I had a building permit to remodel my house. I had a permit to enclose the hallway. That required a new roof. I was operating under the assumption that it was an allowable thing for me to do. The house was inspected and signed off on and no one mentioned that by enclosing that overlap I was creating a non- conformity. I didn't realize it was. I don't think any of us actually did until we delved into this particular issue. I don't think that it was an intentional violation of any codes on my part. It was done as a safety issue. I am sure you can appreciate that. I have to admit that your point is well taken that there are other things you can do for security but when things are stolen from you, there is a bit of emotion that does come into play and if you have ever been through that, I am sure you can appreciate it. Remo asked if there were any other public comments. Joe: I would ask that the Board look back at this thing in the way in which you looked at it when you first heard about it. You guys aren't to be a criminal law jury to sit here and decide that Dale was a bad guy because he overlooked the fact that he needed 14 ( ( l a permit to put the west wall on. Therefor, we are going to punish him by not giving a variance that if he hadn't done that we would otherwise give. That isn't really the role of this Commission. Look at it from the standpoint of what have we got here. What is this going to harm? What is the best thing to do under the situation for the community, for the land use codes, for the building, for the health, safety and welfare of its occupants and its people? What is reasonable under the circumstance? Your initial reaction was very accurate. It is totally silly to say that he can't put a door on the back of the garage. All of his neighbors support it. Nobody complained. Everybody thinks it is a great idea. The thing has been there for 25 years. It ain't gonna get any bigger. Its gonna get better if we put the door on it. The police want him to put the door on it. He wants to put the door on it. The neighbors want him to put the door on it. So why don't we do the thing that is right and let him have the door on it? It just seem incredulous that we would get hung up in some other logic to turn down what everyone thinks is the most reasonable thing to be done here under the circumstances. It is a plea for logic and reason and humanness. We have come back. We are asking for a building permit. We want to put on the fire wall. We want to put on the core door. We want to do it legally. We will do everything Bill wants us to do. We will do it twice. We are trying to be lawful, law abiding citizens here for an oversight. It ain't gonna hurt a person in the world and it's gonna help Dale and it's gonna help the police. The only people its gonna help by you guys denying it is some burglars. And everybody is gonna be harmed. Francis: I am unclear as to how much of the walls of the existing part were added without a permit. Joe: This section here and here and this section here and this section here. And the top was already there. This wall was already here and the top across here was already here. Ron: And this one was added under the permit in '82? Joe: This was already always on the carport. always on the carport. What Dale added was this little section around the corner. This drop down was this section. And Francis: Was this 7 ft or so? Joe: Yes. Ron: You mean this used to be open here? Joe: No, no, this was part of the house. That was started in 15 ( ( l """,> '70 before he bought it. Bill: So this roof is now connected. Francis: There is no wall along there? Joe: No. Remo: So there is no wall there? Joe: No. Bill: You have to keep a 10 ft separation between a carport, the carport roof and--it doesn't need to have a wall. Just needs a roof. Just a carport. You can't put the carport right up against your main building. You can attach it. You don't need a separation there. Remo: Well, if the carport is he r e, then it becomes a non- conforming use. Joe: For 25 years its been like that, which is now nonconforming. Remo: Now, there was no line here. Joe: Well there is a pole. Bill: There was a separation there. I can find no proof that this connection was made with a legal permit. That doesn't mean that it was not done legally. Remo: But he had a permit. Bill: No he didn't. Remo: To connect this roof? Bill: No. Remo: He didn't. See, I guess my point was before that when I asked you whether they could put a wall between that, you said no, they can't because it is not 10 feet. Bill: Right. Remo: But I am saying to you that there was no wall. They don't have to put a wall, but once you connect it by the roof that changes it and you did connect it with a wall there. He connected with a sidewall and a roof. Dale: The connection was done in '70 and so because of blowing 16 ( snow and buildup, I just had a little roof about 6 inches, you know, its just sloping so there is a natural grade. Actually they just sloped everything from this end. Bill: Did you have a building permit to do that? Dale: Yes. Bill: Do you have copy of it? Dale: In '82 I got a permit to put a door right here. I want to stress that when I enclosed this it was an outside hallway. Ron: There was no roof there before? Dale: Right. In '82 the house needed a new roof and it was a decision made with the roofer, you know, where do you want the water to run? Bill: Did you get a roofing permit? Dale: I used a licensed contractor. Bill: You got a licensed contractor. You got a roofing permit and that is a different thing. You got a permit to re-roof a roof which you don't go and inspect and you don't look ( Joe: You don't expect anything to be added, any construction to be added Bill: So this connection was not made, this is an additional thing you should have had a permit for instead of just a roofing permit. Dale: I used their license for roofing contractors Bill: The roofing contractor? That's why I don't have any plans for this and no record. A roofing contractor is a different thing. Dale: I assumed he got one. Bill: Well, I don't think you can assume, I thought he would have but he didn't that I can see. Charlie: I can see that was a very honest mistake. l Remo: Yea, I don't find any fault in that. Francis: As I understand it, part of the walls at the back were added without a permit and the roof was connected without a permit. Is that correct? 17 ( ( ( Dale: The roof was done with a roofing contractor. Francis: Connecting and adding more to connect the building. Joe: Well Francis, nobody knows. We don't have a permit copy. That was 6 years ago. They don't have a copy so we can't say whether it was done lawfully or not. Remo: But a licensed roofing contractor did the work. Dale: Yes. They are a licensed contractor. They work in this valley every day. I assumed that they were legitimate and honest. I paid them fees and put that roof on and they handled the whole thing for me. Bill: walls The thing is it was still a carport and we have two more and what do we do about that? Remo: We have several letters. They are form letters and Ron will read one and I will enter the names for all of those for the record. Ron: Dated July 9, 1987, City of Aspen, Board of Adj ustments, Dear Board of Adjustments: I support the request by the Potvins to enclose their existing carport into a garage. I understand their carport has been in existence since 1970 and that the enclosure represents no further expansion into the rear yard setback. I feel it is in everyone's best interest because it will provide more security for all of us who use the alley by making the Potvin's personal items less visible for potential thefts. Aesthetically, it will give the alley a nicer look. Please grant the potvins the variances needed to accomplish this enclosure. Signatures to this letter are as follows: Jack Barker, Lots K, L, & M, Block 43 John Lizzo, Lots R & S, Block 43 Marguerite M. Scheid, Estate, Lot A, B, C, Block 43 Sharon M. Prior, Lots D & E, Block 43 Vivienne E. Jones, Lots F, G, H, & I, Block 43 C.M. Clark, Lot R & S, Block 43 Dale: I sat down with each person and reviewed exactly what was done. I disclosed that I had built a wall illegally. I showed them the maps. That is a form letter just out of convenience because I did not feel I wanted to infringe upon my neighbors to write something out. You are welcome to call anyone. There are some people from in town and some from out of town. I have their total support for this action. 18 c ( l Remo asked if there was any further public comment. There being none he closed the publ ic portion of the meeting and asked for comments from the Board. Charlie: I had the same reaction that you did, Remo, when I went by there. I looked at all the other houses and saw the nice closed-in area, especially the one down at the end of the block. I said I can't possibly believe that he does not have a garage door on this. I did not know at the time that he did add a section of a wall to make it look the way it looks. But when I look at the whole picture and all the things you have said, which I agree with you, there is definitely a wrong when something is added without a building permit. There are some doubtful gray areas. But when I look at the whole thing, I can see an honest error taking place between a roofing contractor and an owner in solving th.e problem. You put a new roof on a building and say, look, I have ice dams here and snow in between the building, all these problems--how am I going to solve them? The roofing contractor goes down, he gets a permit to re-roof. They do a little addition of 3 feet on the sloping roof. They sol ve the problem. I can see where that is an honest error. It isn't something that is planned by the owner to bypass a building inspector. I also think it is a minimal variance. It is a reasonable request, a logical consequence of all these circumstances. I see - a property right of this owner which is enjoyed by others in the same vicinity and zone. I see there is a health and hazard problem where if it is not granted, there is a half-finished situation. I know the City is not going to go into a legal situation. I feel strongly that they won't make him tear off that roof and cause an unsafe house which is going to cause problems again. He is going to have a sloping roof which drops then into a hole if you make him take down those connections that we have been told have been added, illegally, yes but they have been added. I have had problems with thefts and you feel like you are invaded by something you can't handle. There is no way you can solve the problem. If I had a boat, I can't put it in my child's bedroom. I have a motorcycle. I can't stick it in my bedroom. You know, its very impractical to ask people and say well you can get other storage places. I feel that the only solution we can really humanly do in this case is to grant the variance and be done with it. And give the police a little peace of mind and the owner peace of mind because that is a real problem anywhere where you have nice houses and you have a lot of belongings. I would grant the variance. Remo: Charlie, you addressed the roofing contract and I think we might agree with you on that. But you really sluffed over that 19 ".', ( other little wall that they put up illegally. would you care to state your rationale in allowing that to happen before you grant him a variance? Charlie: I can see where the evidence presented shows that the owner was planning to put the garage door on. The only way to put the garage door on is to build those walls. You can't build a garage door against an open post and have a hole there. Again I don't feel we are looking at somebody with criminal intent because I don't feel that's what this is all about. I think that somebody was trying to solve a problem and it may have been not quite legal and then a lot of people don't know that a small roof or a small wall has got consequences in the zoning code. c.) I don't feel the neighborhood is served by us not granting the variance. I understand your points. I agree with them but I want to go beyond that. I feel that we have a problem to solve not only for the City but for the owner. I think it is a real serious problem. The Building Department can't solve it. We are his last resort. We are here to try to bring justice and humanism to a pretty harsh zoning code. When you look at this in context, the zoning code doesn't make sense for this particular situation. I can't solve it by adhering to the zoning code. Remo: I agree with you but he had recourse and that was to come to this Board in order to get that variance to do that and present those arguments that you are presenting to me now, to the chair. They could present it to the Board at the same time and we would have looked at it in that manner. Right? Charlie: I think it is an honest oversight. Rick: I think the fact that the applicant has or should have had superior knowledge to the lay person as to building permits. I have a problem with that. I can empathize with the applicant's loss to thefts. I, too , in the same vicinity, have had a number of thefts this year from my home. I don't have the luxury of a garage or a carport. There is nowhere on my property I could put one and abide by all the setbacks. I have to make other ar rangements. I usually do that by taking a storage shed down valley and that is a pain in the neck as we all know. But that's life in the west end in the R-6 zone. c I don't know if we have ever granted a variance based on recurring thefts as being a hardship. Al though I feel empathy for the applicant, I don't know if that is a consideration I can justify giving a variance for. I think Remo' s comments are well taken as to possibly building another secure area within the confines of that carport, perhaps another partition wall between the house and where the car would naturally stop. I don't know if granting this variance would actually be in keeping with the spirit or the letter of the comprehensive plan. I think we are, 20 "'''....... ( in fact, granting a variance to increase a non-conforming situation. It was a carport. Now all of a sudden it is close to a garage. It is this creeping situation that we are faced with constantly. Again it may not have been the cause of the applicant but I think it is a consideration. I personally, I am torn. This is a tough one. I don't think I would be prepared to grant a variance. Ron: I have to agree with Rick. It is tough. Some of the walls have been there longer than others and so on and 50 forth. But I don't see a hardship. I think that special condition results from the actions of the applicant, maybe inadvertent, honest mistakes but they were his actions. Nobody else put up the walls or anything else. I think that the simplest thing to do would be to add a garage for him and be done with it like Charlie suggests. However, I think that would be going against the code. It would be condoning this creeping disregard for the code that I feel in this situation. It is real easy to say oh it is just a garage now but there was 6 years when a lot of things were going on to get it to this point. It is 95% finished so it is not worth going back and tearing it down. I would like to see something done. But I think that the non-conformity should be reduced back to the 1982 level, the last time that a building permit was issued. I would not grant this variance. Joe: Well, that's it because you have to have 4 votes. ( Remo: I thought maybe you would like to hear the comments. For the record, we want to put them down. Francis: I feel that the special conditions and circumstances resulted from the action of the applicant. And I don't think we can excuse something by holding it as an honest mistake. That is not the way the Board has handled things in the past and I don't think it should handle it that way now. I also feel that an applicant has two strikes against him when he comes in and admits that he added a part of the structure without a permit with the intention of putting the door in and probably would have put the door in except for the stop order. I am very sympathetic in your problem. I have had thefts with people corning right into my yard and stealing things out in the Snowbunny area. I feel the Board has to go by certain pr inciples and guidel ines and I don't feel that you have met them enough to justify a variance. I am very sorry. l Remo: Basically I feel the same way. I have stated my position. The only thing that I could add is that I really don't subscribe to the idea that because something done honestly but illegally should be allowed to continue in its non-conformity. So I would be against granting this variance. Ron: I move to deny this variance. 21 ( Francis seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Ron Erickson, yes, Francis Whitaker, yes, Charlie Paterson, no, Rick Head, yes, Remo Lavagnino, yes. Variance denied. Ron made a motion to adjourn. Rick seconded the motion with all in favor. The time was 5:15 pm. Clerk ( ( 22 :jJJ.. . , ,r " /'''~ CITY--OF- ASPEN BOARD 'OF'ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER-3,--1987 4:0o--P.M. A G--E 'N'DA I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. MINUTES OF AUGUST 13, 1987 IV. CASE 187-9 Dale and Sally Potvin V. ADJOURNMENT -,-,-,---~ , NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case 187-9 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 Council 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 24, 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, then you are urged to state your views by letter, particularly if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adj ustment will give serious consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. The particulars of the hearing and of the requested variance are as follows: Date and Time of Meeting: Date: Time: September 3, 1987 4:00 p.m. Owner for Variance: Appellant for Variance: Name: Address: Dale & Sally Potvin 320 West Bleeker Dale & Sally Potvin Location or description of Droperty: 320 West Bleeker Variance Requested: Applicant appears to be requesting a re- hea ring of ca se it 87-9 which was a request for conversion of a carport to a garage that already encroaches into the rear yard setback. (Original request attached) Wil1 aDDlicant be represented by counsel: Yes: x No: The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Jan Carney, Deputy City Clerk ., .",..., NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case 187-9 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 Council 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 24, 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, 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 surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. The particulars of the hearing and of the requested variance are as follows: Date and Time of Meeting: Date: Time: July 2, 1987 4:00 p.m. Owner for Variance: Ap'Oellant for Variance: Name: Dale ~ Sally Potvin Address: 320 West Bleeker Dale & Sally Potvin Loca~ion or descriphiOD Qf~PAQ~~t~~ 320 West Bleeker Variance Requested: Property is in the R-6 zoning category. Rear yard setback is 15 ft. Actual carport setback appears to be 7'4" and therefor encroaching into rear yard setback. Sec 24- 13.3 (a) no such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or attached in a way which increases its nonconformity. Applicant appears to be asking to complete the conversion of the carport to a garage in the rear yard setback. Duration of Variance: Permanent Will aoolicant be reoresented bv counsel: Yes: 'X No:~_ The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Jan Carney, Deputy City Clerk '. " r'-' '. j CITY OF ASPEN Owner: Same Case No.: 87- 9 Add ress: -320 Wes't Bleeker Phone: 925-6096 (H); 920-2300 Address: Same Date: August 14, 1987 Appellant: Dale and Sallv Potvin Location of Property: 320 West Bleeker. Lots N & O. B10ck 43. City of ARppn . (Street and Number of Subdivision Block and Lot No.) Building Permit Application and prints or any other pertinent:. data must accompany.:thi~ application, and will be made part 9f CASE NO.: -. - ., . THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION. DESCRIPTION OF-PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOWING JUSTIFICATIONS . . .." .,.....,.... SEE APPLICATION FOR REHEARING'~iTAcHED HERETO. '! ... ,'.:"J Will you be represented~fY counsel? ,~ rYes No .~.~ ,. r ~ (Applicant's Signature) c==a==================aaa=ac_aaa______aa============aa=CCD_aaa_ PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO FORWARD THIS APfLICATIO~.JO T~BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON FOR NOT GRAllT~NG:;_~~lt~ ~v-r~~~ a ~~L' 51 c~ ~1-1, ~l~& N"~"i..~ ~;...: of " C<Y> ~ "'n 1~. '1" {4(- CDlJ'2ZQ. \ ,~~ v....{c-\t", ~ V)OvtJ S:J- ~K .,,~ """'. . -'''; ". wJ b .':~ ~gne6 :,. Status PERMIT REJECTED, DATE APPLICATION FILED ~ \ \ l( ( -~) \ DECISION DATE OF HEARING SECRETARY DATE MAILED , , ,C""", APPLICATION FOR REHEARING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 87-9 DALE AND SALLY POTVIN The applicants, Dale and Sally Potvin, request a rehearing before the Board of Adjustment on the grounds of newly discovered evidence. The applicants seek approval to enclose a carport which intrudes seven feet, eight inches into the IS-foot rear-yard setback. The prior application stated that the nonconformity was created in 1982 when the roofs were connected by the appli- cants during a remodel and replacement of the roof. Subse- quent investigation has revealed that that statement was incorrect. A copy of the prior application is attached as Exhibit A. The building permit denial application is attached as Exhibit B. The drawing showing the relation of improvements to the rear yard is attached as Exhibit C. The east side wall on the carport had been connected to the house when the house was built in 1962 and, therefore, the carport has been part of the principal residential structure for more than 25 years. This became apparent to counsel for the applicants when, for the first time, he saw pictures of the house taken in 1982 in the course of the hearing and did not at that time realize the full implica- tion of the existence of the wall. A copy of the photographs is attached as Exhibit D. Subsequent to the hearing, the applicants located the former owner of the house, who advised them that the east wall of the carport was attached to the house when the house was constructed by his parents in 1962. A copy of the former owner's affidavit is attached as Exhibit E. The 1956 original zoning allowed a five-foot rear-yard setback, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit F. The carport portion of the residence intrudes into the IS-foot rear-yard setback approximately seven feet, eight inches. The reasons expressed for the denial for the variance at the prior hearing were that the Board could not condone the fact that the applicants had installed the replacement west wall on the carport without getting a building permit and that the nonconformity had been self created because the applicants had connected the carport to the residence in 1982 when the roofs were connected. There is a difference between a nonconforming use, which is not involved in this case, and a nonconforming setback encroachment, which is. In this situation, either a carport or a garage is allowed by right as proper "uses" in this zone, so whether the structure is a carport or a garage is actually irrelevant because both uses are allowed. The nonconformity exists regardless of whether it is one or the other. The "", nonconformity in the structure arises only as a result of the encroachment into the setback and has nothing to do with whether it is an enclosed garage or an unenclosed carport. What is prohibited and discouraged is the expansion of the nonconformity. In this case, whether you use the encroach- ment area as a carport or a garage is irrelevant and has no effect on either increasing or decreasing the nonconformity. Therefore, on the grounds of this new evidence that the nonconformity was not created by the applicants but that the carport was attached to the principal residence when orig- inally built, the applicants request a rehearing on their request for a building permit to enclose a carport which already exists within the l5-foot setback. Applicants have enclosed a new mailing list and will renotice the adjacent owners for a subsequent hearing. August 13, 1987 D4/07 -2- 1-' CITY OF ASPEN Case No.: Address.: 320 West Bleeker Phone: 925-6096 (H): 920-2300 .Address:' Same (.... "-:'j Date: June e, 1987 Appe 11 an t : Dale and Sally Potvin Owner: Same Location of Property: 320 We.st RlpP1~pr 'Tot'.c::; N ~ 0, ".R1ork 41r f:it'y of A!=:ppn (Street and Number of Subdivision Block and Lot No.) Building Permit Application and prints or any other' pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part of CASE NO.: THE BOARD WILL RETURN' THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION. DESCRIPTION OF ..PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOWING JUSTIFICATIONS Applicant requests pennission to install an overhead garage door to close off a carport. Permission was rejected on building permit application #10501, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A. The carport was built with the original residence in 1962 and is 7' 4" from the alley and, therefore, beyond the 5' R-6 rear-yard ~etb~ck for accessory structures (Sec. 24-3.4). An improvement survey showing the position of the carport and house on the lot is attached as Exhibit B. A recent survey of the carport/garage relative to the alley is attached as Exhibit C. The carport was unknowingly made technically nonconforming in 1982 when the gap between overlapping roofs and side walls of the caro:>oit wer.e closed "connecting" the carport to the residence. The R-6 setback for a residence is IS'. The overhead door' is nonstructural and will not increase any existing nonconformity of the carport/garage which has existed in this location since 1962. Applicant requests that the Board of Adjustment determine that this is a nonstructural ad~ition to an existing nonconforming structure that will not increase the nonconformity and, therefore, is allowed by ~24-13.5(a) or ~24-13.3(a). Alternatively, applicant requests a finding that the Board exercise its (continued on reverse) l-lill you be represented by counsel? Yes ---X- No II' (Applicant's Signature) =============================~=========~a===a=========Da====m===~========== PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO FORHARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON FOR NOT GRANTING: tl \ ~ \'(\~,:/. (\~ \~" \'fj)Y , !~'Jy() (; Signed Status PERMIT REJECTED, DATE APPLICATION FILED r.1AILr.D DECISION DATE OF HEARING SECRETARY #HIBlT If DATE " ~ f r~ " ~ authority under ~2-21(3) to vary the application of the rear-yard setback regulation as applied to this building so that "spirit of ordinance will be observed, public safety and welfare secured and substantial justice done." On the issues of observance of the spirit of the ordinance and substantial justice done, the purpose of setbacks is a buffer for adjacent owners. Assuming the "connection" of the carport to the residence during the 1982 remodel changed the structure from a conforming accessory structure to a nonconforming portion of the principal residence, it is the least noncon- forming rear-yard problem on that entire block. Every other property owner on that bloek has either an accessory or principal structure that violate the rear-yard setback more than the applicants' carport/garage. In fact, all the buildings on the north side of the block intrude into the platted alley right of way. These encroachments are shown on the map attached as Exhibit D. Adding the requested door will be a benefit to the neighborhood, since it will block from view cars, bikes, garden tools, etc. On the issue of practical difficulty, it is infeasible to relocate the garage elsewhere on the property as can be seen from Exhibit B. On the issue of unnecessary hardship, the appli- cants have suffered two major thefts of thousands of dollars of tools, bicycles and sporting equipment from this open carport. Just last week, the police requested they close their garage door since there have been a lot of garage thefts recently in this area. Applicants have had to J:l-Jve their l,indsurfer, bic:,cles and tools into the guest bedrOOM. r,>;l~ l,';'ii' I :'-X'/ r':"~t~( ,.".,.. ',;.\~~ '."'.' .:~ .. ,,),.i." -~-..-~~.~. '.;~~'t -, ".' 9. Chang. of use from Typ. 1" con~!~l~on(~~ ~~~~';~~~~~~}~~~~~~:~~"~~ Size of BuHding ~4:~t!j1iO!fI:1.~i,~ (To\ILSqu,u. F~., 'f."" '?:ii, ~'":f'~)'j):t.l't'l'!c.('i-;,,~')rf:~"'j :'<],', ,.,~,,,,,....,,.~.\..<,~~,,,, :,'~ ,TOTAL FEE' ,.~, . ',:" .~' ,,,:'.'1' Chang. of ~" to ",; ',' '~'." ___' ,:,:/':"~,:.';,;", . ......r,.- ,,' ..~. '~:J~'''':'i,- '{~~~..(:~.; :'::~\'1l:O ..;;' :~:,\~!.:)~~~~~~,~::,;;~,:,;~'if:9;~~~7&~':' ,~'",' '~r .'l::/i'~'~/;~':&W~~~~~!~Ji~ PLAN, CHECKf'"SE;J'<:':{f. "';';':;"'F'~:. PERMI T. F EE ;'~1;'f.'$,~::t~1-';;~~~~~F:t;!~i':,:~: ~{(,t.~~ !;'~~;;'::;:~:;:' 11. REMARKS:"" , ., /1.(../" (~)...//: ""!;" .;~:- ;~/_'~ (" " /~'... '..~.i~(~' ~~N:/.<" "',:{~ 1('/'~~;1~~ /,':: 'i. I-!;~;'I' A/I!',.: .,.,.:/ />~t" Vw'/'",~'.,~,',:},~' 'h-",~";"~,,;.,,,, ::II~ t""~:.0s';~:: ;'.'/)' ~;./t:~,:[;.,:'.. QccuPlncy, Orouo,' ",' "',~, ~~~~~;'~~;i$:;~~:~~?]~~;{:!'f:<; Lot Ar.. . .;' ' ,~',t: ~',.. r.~~~H!{' 1 a.Valu.t;on of work: $ ':t:ft~~t';J;~~#.\1~~~4~~' 7.;;.:':~.' ce:. ~~Id'" ~'~~;~:..?:,. .-....... ' .t:,~,Fi . ' NO. OF BEDROOMS EXISTING ;,;:,..; i.:":~',:'AOOEI) ",'i;'';<;':,~'~1"'~ r,.~"'.;f:lt,.~,,!,>'"i' UI. Zon.v,:, ">'-:":"',.. ":i.'~"" '~:,~~(~*N--E~~~jF:r; :t{:~~i :,c. Fir. Sprlnkl." R'Qulr.d O,'V.I ",:~:}:"N~,,;' , '- .~. ,"." , V 't",...1' r- ~,....I('",',,( '., i i'~"', ".;4 IL !'Io.~ ot Dwelling Unlu:~WJ'~:;'~;' "<>'J.",lc,~"..",,~' ".." "'. ;~-?!!';if' '~.~:~:Jr,;'I(\(!,~~~~'b:~,"~;'1>. ,,' ';,~'," ,~',:--.~,. ,~". ".oJf< ,..d",.' OP:FSTR!!ET:.PAR~INQ SPACES, CO~~1Cl '''':. .Unco....rl<l~.. " 'p.o. :''';.c: ,', ':",.; DATE ~PPL.ICATION ACCEPTED .,:,..," ,:~/;:::':C'~:)f~'}V: SOIL REPORT.; \:;,'~. ' BV BV, ;.., . "'." PARK DEDICATION';;': WATERTAP"C' '. DATE DATE NOTICE,i~' . '" ".;. : ;~'~t, SEPARATE PERMITS ARE' REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL. PLUMBING. HEATING. VENTILATING OR AIR CONOITlONjNG. "'.,,.., ,,0'>' THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL ANO VOID IF WORK OR' CONSTRUCTION ' AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCEO WITHIN 120 OAYS, OR IF CONSTRUe" TION OR WORK IS SUSPENOEO OR ABANOONEO FORA PERIOD,QF,120" DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS C9MMEN.CED. . '<"~. .(, .,;,,,:(. ,;:/, I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT'I HAVE~ READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT,ALL PAOVISIONS'OF"LAWS" ~,NO ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH'" WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OFA PERMIT DOES NOT 'PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR 'CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF .' ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OR THE PER. . FORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION. ENG, DEPT, ' I FIRE MARSHALL',: '<"~' OTHER (SPEClfY)"'~~ ..~""", '(j/ ! i .' THIS FORM IS A PERMIT ONtV WHEN VALIDATED' , WORK STARTED WITHOUT PERMIT WILL BE DOUBLE FEE ,J~ S,lGNATURE o~ ~ONHU":TOR OR AUTHORIZED AGENT /'/~,"'~~:~1:~:<'~:'~/'"'' . IDATE) /"'-o#'~' ....':,.; -:'., :/1 /'/" DATE EX~IIBJT ~ I N RE F 0 N R IF WNLR.~Ull..DERI / PERMIT VALIDATION CK.D M.D. 0 VALIDATION CASH 0 PLAN CHECK VALIDATION CK.D M,O.D CASH 0 - , 1~~~~~7~.".~:::::/j:~~Y:~il'IJ I I \':4 ,I, II II'j t: ._', .. : :: 1 ' l I 1\ '.1, ~ ", II "" .'.' \ II II::,~'\, II" II:;: 1_.j~_J II II n ,~ II \\~ ..J .~. _~. -i- , -- ,- .'. ,,\ ''I:' '''~. : . . ,',. 4....01 " ,1. , , ...:-~, :~~~.,t4 ~: -' :. , , \ . - ......~......""" ",,~~'''''-~r:~. ';", ~', . ,". :.t .'J: .' ',' . .. "... .. ',.':: ." ::" :"",; .." , ,0'.. "I,'.:: "... '.:1'.:\,'\;" ii <".:,:'::'.?;>t:>:";:' " . l.t l.; , l' ,\ ,',' it':~ : h ;:,;,' '~:-:~:+:_:/;l: :;~{:;;. .~':<.' ~::;f >~,,' I' I ' , ~ ". .' "i~::.~::';<:;i':;':~,,;~ ::i.;, , l';r 'I, 't-. ,~.!' I '..\.-,;,(ll....~ . '"l' " p......, '. .~ to; ~".;.I ' :r,: " .,\~::p,,,;,..~,..1, ,". :,'11 :,!;;*;i~~r,:}:)"'...'.!l '. , . "t'. ~..:~. II,::, /, ,:. ,.... j. ~. '.... ". .' .! '\. ,'j'I' " ;:.'(.~;',;, l' ~ ,I, ',',','~ . - . "":,' "'. .......' ,', ,..,' .,' I" :li'.=' .~ ,'.; ", , ~ ..i ",' .,' '.:, - --"" .~. . II \I II tI .11 II I -t I , \ . \ I, ,) - I /"1 ,10 " ...... . -, , to- 'Q' , '- - , .,', , . . -- ''':,:.::. -'-,;:.=-- "J.- ' " t,-_t~"",~-~~, · ..:-:....:::...,~'~.'Jt""..:J!~.-.-,..~~ "...., '-'- --.-" qL71i:I'.:~ ';;':;;<~\:r:'~.:/" ...,.. iE) 0', "....., :It, ~Ti '::'1"'" ..,. ...: ,,~y ,:'" ~;"'., "\ ',';: ~" " '., ". I , . f' ';' ( . ',', ' . ..~. ; 0. ~\ :\ ;":~1' ~\, ,: f :~.:' '" " . I..' I'" i ,,;,',' "", ,', '., ~:~ '\h'n !.,',;.;r!lr', Ji'l, /~' ..i. i' 'f: It. ..1, t "11"", 'j;'" ",jl ::-"t:""lll : .~ '," .' I ~.' ' . .- I., .. ::':,:j;;'; I':::'~";~"':(:;l": ." .:', I "'l!l' ,'" d; Ii .'1" I I" J:::' l'i:~Y:':I.~;t:":I"'::" '.' I. _':~, ,I,.' '1, (', J' ,I ,1" " t:' '~' ,( "l'~';l ~ ' .' ' ' "',, ' ..'.' "r.'" '" _.' ' ~~, ; \:tr'" ..I:j'l,{!:. ,..:\..~,: ,t.' ,,' .J','l\l~/\ ~ i I /~ I, t. :' \ i: ~i :.J ,:-:' \ V 1,' I .'.,'. '". . . 01' "\" \ I, I'., .~, ~ ,/ .:..." ,:'~'l " 1 II ',' ~.' , ;", 1\; Ii I,~i';:~t ..:1'1" I; " .\ ::~! :' t ~ \ ," ': ' ..'. ' " .!:~(t, :~?~,.,l~, ",; ,II .l ~"tt"':', ',l.',;'J" f I . '\~: : .111 " " , ~~;~ll" I ,::t.:;l ~:. ~. II' _ ;' ).~... ' !' -'J. ;. . i' , J ,".~.' , , " .. . J ~J i ,A:', ~ t .~ ,; '::. >:jl';"\;"'>;:'" .\" : ';,':' ',J<'" : 'd. I ")J"~" :\;1~f;r~ri::::Y i:1 ;', \'t ~ I' .t' I ",'/'1 1 I . ,~\ml", :1,-:",.i.{~,,',~'1 :;<~i" ,~ .\ .':.1'.... rT.:".~',,::....,,~..,..: ~:arf:;~;: ':,;.:_":~'77'~1.,;~_.... 1: ",~..*;.:r,.~J;":id:P;": ~~:;.~. :--o::,r;,It' .,.-; '. . - -:,:1 ~' ':;i", ,'.,1 . ;---'; :,.'; .", '. ,,:,',"jj...:..:' , " , 1. ";"""1"""":' ',. '.._'~._.__..__."~._"- .-;-,;.- " : II' "1 .' ,:~, t I " . ".. ,"1- '.~' .! .' ',': .! ..' ,~: :,' '., -: .;' ," ,; "l " '-'-,"" " , , , , ". '.' . .- 1'" '....."..: .'" '- ' " ~ ~:<... i ",., ''>I, ;, {" .l', " .Vfj.i' , . '.' .. "", ': '-', '." '" ",: " ," '" ,,,",,, , ..; 1.' I : '.~ /' t' .... ", , '-\..' :. ..!~,!~ \,-" , . " . "~ ,i, " ;' " , " " !. ,,', ;"')" , "1Ii \ :', i ;'~ i . : " " ,:'.1._ ..... , . .~::.. , , , . ~' "- ..", ". .,.' , ",t .' ,..' ,,'. . I , '-++',," .U..,,. '" " . '.,:.1 '. .. ';.! r '. .;,: :~,;.I " ,/;I',:;:,J... "., '\ ,,' ...... .' ';"'1,,- :.""t, . . '. " " ':-., "~ A' ~ ;:, .;, (." .. ,i ,,' :j';:..... ',' , " ,. ;, ' ,t ~ :' 'y,'~<~<i., ' . ')";'~. ~.' I" .'.' ,', ~ 'i-::.\- f':.. ' , ,.. ,t-, ~ ':~J,'. h';:' '.'... " " .., ;.1 .' .:._~ .,: ", '!~.~ ~~/ ' " '. . '" , .' , 1. .;.,;' <, J_ ;,' ,~ --::: ';) '1 .r:!. .... r,.'.: 3 .... . ~: a..',' ,~ ... ~ ..... . Ir-::..... " ~' . t '\:l ~. ."1 ... "< IV u v ,~ <:\.. '> f.\( o /'" 'I I:., ft. ,~ '" 1 ! r. ',~ I ", .:i T"' 't: " ~ .\ ''lJ ..... ...... ,l: ) .'-' <. 'j:. ':l D 't ........ , ~ ,~ '.\ 'I;:: --;;' ,"\:.,' ,""j.I,.. '-v ,tI ~ '1 1 '" t~ " , ':: .' '.: " " il:i /;,;'d-:" ,,'; !: . ~ ','. " " ,. l.~ , I'i';.~ 'i"" .,' "~'. ': '.,l. I, i '"i' ' ';'';:{'''I'' 'I :i ',' 'f!. " ~ ~ ~ :1 ,', Hi ';i'~'~;"~' l--. ~ o ~, , ~ , '. " ,. ~ . . , , , ' ;, I,', ,,;1 '.'" " '.' ;,.' .' I'., , , " i ~ I I :' I ~. . j ., , . J.~ . " :~HI~lr~, ~ a . J 1'...- 1'.:', .\... r : ~." ~~ l\' ~ ~-) -\. '"'~ 'I. '" o ~l ~ ,; "" :. '\ -' t. ~ , !,,) 'i,~' . ... " ~ '1 ...., ~ , "~ " ~\, ~ - \fj~ '. -.. '-1. \l < '( ~ 'I;, ~ <.. ~, i- tJ ~ ~- ~ t( " '"'-<;: ~ ;,. <0 J ~ '= " ~ <" '" - .. h .3 1- "i, \0 . , '-I.":;; ~ t) .", ~ " ...... '. 't (, 'J -I:: \l 'J ..,.. ... ..... .... 'I:) ~ ~ ., <,;> ~ (!' oJ .... .'l' et - \9-...1 .. -.) '('; 'l - ~ . '" { ~ '. t:', " , A -I I \ I I I 'I I 1,:1 , . ',,,, ~ .' 1 ~: ,1"~1 "'~'/,\, \. <.' , .' ) '"I,~ I, ') . \ ,. I~\"'\' ';to:' ~ ';.' '\';.1 ~~I 'j'l . I '. t.. ,Ii ' ::':,(fi';,:')...,~ ~ ',#\.;':. . ~ \.'- '. .~ .!<~. :'~, ~~ , , .1,-,.... I : ,:;,,:,; I ,;':::~ ~ ~ r-- 'I I/>:~.,..'. ,:.~.:~\.j'iO.~ '" . & ~ '~'\ ' .,! \1 ~ ..... ~ \~.. I' ~ V,1- It) 1~ ~'1:-4 ',;,,, ~'~ ,l . f ~ ~.' ,. ,. ~ I' ,j~,". ~.: f.. ;~ JJ ...... 'l!~ , ' , 'llJ~'_ I. I ,... "I , ,..1 "...., ': I - j-..'~ -~,.._,+ , " ""-:~'a...""""'~.":'::--.'~~_~'N' "'-:,!' " >iL~_..-:".7,.IOl'_.lobu1,' , , , .' :.;" :".,1 . ~ : ., . " ',I I,': , ,1\ .," \\ ::1:." Ii; \:,1-. t "."j~.' . :l, :!-'! '., .. .. . " l' ; " , j-:, . ".1, :'; , I ~, ?)~ ,;' G ~ t\;, ." :t1 " '.,. " ., ". ,: " B 8 lLl ~ 2 , '! z I ) I I '"" r~""~~ ALLEi PJ L /<..., +? '? 7'5001' II" E:- OC:XY -- ..' -. I "vi 7+' e-- -:-:-~~~...!:iC'L~_L In , 17lX'R / '-. WAL-L- rl"c,K""'.... 0,,,,5' I I I I 7,(/ ,-------- I I I I I i I N GARAE::e- t:="Ct.Jt-..\o. KE~ HI/PL,,4,. ( . !--i" ZV,'5J . >--' I I D' .J ltl - Ll. 15 8 \~ V ~ .L 8 11( "- 8 w I1) ~ } I!\ - (}- ~ 't ~ ~ 0 :1: o.l\ 0 EXHIBIT L I I I .' , , "" ~ ~. ~ '- " '~. ...." 0,,''\, '~. " '. "~ " , " ... .,".', "...... '.,' ''',,'. '. \. .. .>~:~~~,"~,'~ ........,.,~~.,.~ .,' ,,>'<,.> ....... ,-,".-, ...~,~": ....~-...., .< .."..... ".", ,;., , " ",', " ". t \' "'~ f / .,~ ~~;..t ;\ .. 'Z " ',". EXH IBIT 1 (' " )1'--. --, . AFFIDAVIT I, Wilford B. Fultz, do hereby state that I was the owner of the residence at 320 West Bleeker In Aspen, Colorado from approximately 1972 until I sold It to Dale A. Potvin and Sally Alien-Potvin In 1982. I recleved the property as a part of the estate of my parents who bul It the home and carport In 1962. I was faml liar with the property during my parents ownership as wel I as whl Ie I owned It, Since construction In 1962 the carport had an east side wal I that was connected to the northeast corner of the house. This sldewal I remained In existence during both my ownership and the ownership of my parents. aJJll By: Wilford B. Fultz Fultz 01 I Company 6000 Western Place, Suite 120 Fort Worth, Texas 76107 STATE OF --- <' / (c' KIJw COUNTY OF ,- / ;!J'.,(!/!N/ The foregoing Affidavit was subscribed and sworn to before me this ,.;)5~i day of July, 1987, by Wilford B. Fultz, WITNESS my hand and official seal. A=~ A: IL~~ Notary Pub I Ie My commlslon expires: [SEAL] ,~,/J,,/i~p ~ I EXHIBIT E, - ;(:~~;1?, ,..,i.;;;i~;:,:; ..,.J'.." .'.',.' ,..I".. "..:','", "rl,fi;"/";f'Y; ......;. /i,';;',;; 'It '; ;," '",/, tY/ "hi;: ';~~..:D{,;i'::": """,;,;':'it >'i :,,\t./'i/i " "'.::-',j'> ; ";", y;!~;~~H,,;;i';'" ..:;;i"'" ,,'.' ",(,;j:, ,.,"",",', ;:,"'/':: (:,)',';/;!'\i;,Vu, " .,'1.,." ',: ...'" "'. ',", k',:,:;'i;?)X..; ::' ,...j.:,>.. /i';;I< .:, ; ',:, '\"i ., :<'y';//.':/' ,". ,,;"'.-;,' """~ /;[; c,':?H ::'7";, ~,('",!!?:)~(i';S;; ',.,1'," i'> ,i': ,;;,,,,',':> '.':/' ,',. ,:'..,.-"..,' ,.: ,;' i;,:,.;/:;:: '/r,: \:.'.'::i({,ji;'/:,,:H??:::i .'. '.{i ""'/'0::' ,'':: :if' :\;: ""':, :;;,:;i"< 'i,'/:;:' '," '" iX. ,/, ;""":".,,:,;(!'.'i .,':3};6.,.:' i.:,c.;!;'; ',', ,,', \);;',::\,'h;:?):::'..,:',> (' ,.',,',/.f. ;:i>,'Ti:\c;,:,;::.i.:~:::::W;!:.':;:; . ,W ...... i~~~~ ' ":,'" ::>:'''';..,' :':,'{ "j'?." /:, ,i,::;;,,;;,. ,'i;: ;,,':' ,;:, };),':/i"<' ""i,,;;?:!':"": it::. "c,':' ::0' ",.F} /i', :,": }i..~ff'f :"',' ,; ,",' :.H,,:,;;;;::'i' .\, ::: ;""":'-', i,' ,,; Di;E?,: ,;'':',,:,\'}:/'" ';"<i.:XX? .,,:.' 'ii, {.,,;/,l/t:':., :C',:j'y{,.:'.),',..'..':H ? ,/> ";l~r;";;i ;:i ".";" :';;i "\,< ,(..., :'." ;: '.... ,.<';,;:.'; , ' <;:,}, 'i.-?: < ,;}:, " , ,,} ',?'" j';')' ,0''' > " \:": :;: " ''. "\i}t:' "< :'.' ";l'M;,&J1!)U ! , :'!;;':{\ ", >',i',;:, ,,' ~ i\' "".'.'"," ,,:,,', :':' ,',.., .,' r' ill Q) fill a uTI (Li WJl'L ill':' liT). r1U" DlTIf fmn no"~;~, f~ J, :l, ", " ',IJ'" .' "_ u......... " .'''~ ...,. CITY OF ASPEN C:OLOIU\1.l0 .... J PlmSONAl. COpy O~ ./ EXHiBIT 4;:;2-G..h'-a--vY-., ;~~;.::..;,..,~.",.,.,."",.':. ',~". v:'..~~......~~~.::....,.;.. ',.t. ~,,' '~ ." ..",l.l.-<' ,.. ~"," ..'..,>.:.., . ~ ~' , '..../. ", 't ORDINANCE No.6, SERIES OF 1956 .' ./ AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING LAND USE ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE ~ITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; REGULATING THE USE OF THE LAND AND THE USE, LOT AREAS, LOT WIDTHS, AND YARDS FOR BUILDINGS; MINIMUM FLOOR AREA OF DWELLl'NGS, AND OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS; ADOPTING A MAP OF SAID DISTRICTS; PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT, ENfORCEMENT AND AMENDMENT THEREOF; PRESCRIBING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION OF ITS PROVISIONS; AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section I DISTRICTS A) Establ ishment of Districts In order to carry out the provisions of this ordinance, the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby divided into the fol lowing zoning districts: R6, Residential District T, Tourist District B, Business District U, Unrestricted District B) Zoni ng Map The boundaries of these districts are established as shown on a map entitled "Zoning District Map" of the City of Aspen, Colorado, dated the 18th day of June, 1956, which map is hereby made a part of this ord i nance. Section II APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS A) ~xisting Bui Idings The regulations contained herein are not retroactive in their application on existing bui Idings. B) G~neral Appl ication Except as otherwise provided, no bui Idings, or other structure, or land shal I be used, and no bui Iding or other'structure shal I be erected, reconstructed, moved into or within the City Limits, or structurally altered except in conformance with the regulations herein specified for the district in which such bui Iding, is located. Uses Permi tted One-fami Iy dwell ings; Two-fami Iy dwel lings; Public schools, parks, playgrounds, and recreational areas; Churches and church schools; Hospi ta Is; Public uti lity mains, transmission and distribution lines, substations and exchanges. . Farm and garden bui Idings and uses---provided that al I such buildings and storage areas are located at least 100 feet from dwel lings on other lots; Home occupations; Identification signs---one per lot, and only if such signs are unl ighted, less than 3 square feet in area, and describe the lot upon which they are located; Fences, hedges and wal I s---provided such uses are less than ~ feet in height when constructed of materials tending to obstruct motorists vision, and when located within 75 feet of the center line Intersection of two streets or roads. I I. Accessory buildings and uses. Minimum Lot Area ;r ." " '. A) I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. ( 9. I , ! 1 10. * B) <"","'- /","'"" /-.., .,."". Sect I on I I I ~-f ~.- R 6, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . .6000 square feet. c) per dwell i ng Minimum Lot Width per dwe I ling . * . . . . . . . 0 . . .60 feet. D) Minimum Front Yard principal bu I I dings. . . . . . .15 feet. accessory bu i I dings. . . . . . . . .15 feet. E) Minimum Side Yard principal bu II dings. . . . . . . . .5 feet. accessory bu i I dings. . . . . . . . .5 feet on the front one-third of a lot and 2 feet on,the rear two-thirds of a lot. F) Minimum Rear Yard pri nci pal bui Idi ngs. . accessory bui Idlngs. . Minimum Floor Area G) . . .5 feet. . . .2 feet. . . . . . . . . . . per dw~1 ling unit. .'. . . . . . 600 square feet. H) Minimum Off-Street Parking per dwell ing unit. . . . . . . . . . one space. *Refer to 'section VII, paragraphs "B'" and "L n r - 2 - ~ ;,>I....._~'..:.',j,lI;"'.._ ,,"",i ,-.......~......' ~-~'. ."'_~" -...,~,' -", ",-',-,.:....' A' '.. .. d,' .' ',' '~'_ ,""'.~ . ~~,.,,;. .. ..L--'H~' "'': . ~~_. ." - .r' ':;,., , :t ..'- , .~ .1 SElcti on XVI I ~,.' REPEALS, EFFECTIVE DATE A) All ordi nances of the Ci ty of Aspen t nconststent herewi th' to the extent of such inconsistency, and no further, are hereby repealed. B) The repeal of any of the above-mentioned ordinances does not revive any other ordinances or portions thereof repealed by said ordinance. c) Such repeals shal I not affect or prevent the prosecution or punishment of any person for the violation of any ordinance repealed hereby, for an offense committed ,prior to the repeal. D) This ordinance shal I become effective from and after its final passage and legal publ ication. CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO /s/ A. E. ROBISON Mayor Attest:- L /s/ ETHEL M. FROST City Clerk Finally adopted and approved this 2nd day of July, A.D., 1956 /s/ A. E. ROBISON Mayor /s/ ETHEl I.\. FROST :- ,,' ~.. ,. ~:J ;/~'~ ,>>.,..t I ~,.. . '( '\, A,," )-i "" .' 1\ . . . i A '" II' liZ' . -- -:-.~'-'" ./ ... ", ' d ej['" .' " " CC ': '. . i~,1hfJi/L .,' :E r~itJii!'r~:~'~ OOr\",Z!J '.~ v ' . ____ ! '. '\ill.:..:.........:~,:. ,,:.' Ii /'rJ /7 ' ' ...~: . '.~8,~'/fJhf!H aSi0rJ"O':'" [l'UI '~ . ... .............. ...+ '-::1, . I. \..'" ".. .$...1::~.:.:.::.:.. .;..:: - aJ~"\" II> ~ '. '"I ( . '":[;f,::::;',,::"J" /t '-' ~ " ,.._,..~,< , ;';j~i:iJ Db' ,Y)/Ir -- f/) /}; L rofJ~J:f{j , "- r- es . /,:;'(jri[J~1JO:,,)[jifi~'" '< I'" --.J ~ ,.1~71~]'" ::J [atC]:::] [] ~-J ----------- ~ . ] fa" I J fO,' I] t.:, - *CIl .,., ~.. FJ:::/:" ID If] '-' A .' ::.----- ... _ .' L , ,c'" ", " .... z r=:.~J~[J '~J- ~~7][J ~] , A ( ... ,7~ 7ri: L]rD" [~ Ill( z I..}~,j]tt'] , ~ 2 /] ;-Xu /;;11 CJ; " 1_,~r,r--I-:;tJ / I!]']' CJ / r.. A ~LU ' , ., ~ 8 ~ DD~D ..' _ ...;'J' ., 1'" I<l ~:C2i~, "/f ,", ~ 0 ____~ \ " ..... ..~e. · /I .-Y' i ,//""J -..~ rt,~t!I \ .. \ ~ j ~ -" ~ II ~ " . . ':'. .....' ;:":"r' 1 .. I f f J , I , o . ffi @: C).... a . .. . ~ . ~ ;~ft~l: ;~~~ ~ : g a ~ : c ~ i = - I I i 'J . c ... . ~ .' \', t\< RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY OF ASPEN Case No. 87-9 Dale and Sally Potvin This matter came before the Board of Adjustment (Board) on an application for rehearing on a request for a variance to the rear-yard setback and notice having been published and mailed as required. The Board has considered the evidence and the arguments of the applicants. The Board finds: 1. The evidence has shown that a practical difficulty exists in that the applicants are unable to install an enclosed garage in the rear of their single-family residence without intruding into the rear-yard setback. 2. The special condition does not result from the actions of applicants. 3. The special condition is unique to this property. 4. The granting of the variance is essential to the enjoyment of the substantial property right, that is, an accessory enclosed garage, enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity. 5. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the general purpose of the comprehensive plan. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board hereby grants a seven-foot, eight-inch variance to the R-6 zone rear-yard setback requirement for Lots Nand 0, Block 43, City of Aspen, to allow the enclosure of the space previously defined by the existing carport to be constructed as an enclosed garage or similar accessory use to a single-family residence provided that the conditions on such approval shall be: 1. The uses within the setback variance granted shall be limited to accessory uses for single-family residences. 2. No second-story structure shall be constructed within the variance granted. . . ,.. ..,,~ "-~ 3. The owners shall prepare and place of record a covenant running with the land reflecting these conditions and limitations on the uses and structures within the variance hereby granted. Dated: September~, D4/19 R an -2- r ~ "V "" ... ::; "" N ....... ~',,,,? - '"''''' <>;:: co 541 'mliEr03 - '"'< c::a -.- w BooK -<~ """ ""~ Q ITI< .A. RESTRICTIVE COVENANT :Do. n_ --= 0'" 0 "" !!i co "' Cfl') .. ~.~ - THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT is made $E'F'l1::-lV\ ~ 1987, by DALE POTVIN and SALLY POTVIN, owners of Lots N, Block 43, City of Aspen, a/k/a 320 West Bleeker. 15 , o and WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment of the City of Aspen on September 3, 1987, case number 87-9, granted a variance for Lots Nand 0, Block 43, City of Aspen, to allow an enclosed garage to extend seven feet, eight inches into the IS-foot rear-yard setback in the R-6 zone subject to the limitation that the structure within the setback shall be utilized only for accessory uses associated with a single-family residence and that no second story shall be allowed within the setback. THEREFORE, the owners of Lots Nand 0, Block 43, City of Aspen, hereby covenant and ag~ae for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns as a covenant running with the land enforcible by the City of Aspen, that the uses within the seven-foot, eight-inch setback variance shall be limited to accessory uses to a single-family dwelling and that no second story structure shall be allowed within the setback variance area. A copy of a plat prepared by Alpine Surveys, Inc., Box 1730, Aspen, Colorado 81612, Job Number 87-59, which shows the garage extension into the setback, is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Dated: ~~ o\v.) IS \ q'b:t-- , 1987. . ~~-~' SAD Y P IN - (;> COUNTY OF PITKIN ) ) ss. ) Acknowledged before POTVIN and SALLY POTVIN. me September Is-. 1987, by DALE expires _Jf1tJ~ I?"~ /~?? official seal. '1IHlj~'1 commi s s ion \\\\\\ ,,'t'., 'I(~ ,.'- " . <:,:-"'11111_ "-_ l ~\,.~.." 'Wt~~%; my hand and :} "/:"\r1A 0r' \~ ~ ~ >~." \,I ,; r' '. " . ~-v-4- : ,UB\..\~, -s,"'...-\ . ..."" 'Yl, ..... ~.,.~f 0:4... , 'IJlt 1Jill":,,,. ~ .~. ~aJ 'A1w- tary Pub i ~ t I' ' '-fA-LLEI P.J L K.. +""? '" ' ....." BOOK 547 PAGE204 " ? 75ooq'II"E:.- oa:>' -- r------ I I I I I I 7 I , .r; <;;c,; 74 --~~~N;.-Lr DOOR / WAL.L. 'HICl</-ig.'>$ 0,"'5' I I I I l=o..JN 0' /<:EB<'R. W p,-^, C,\ , J-,"",20IBI >---' I I GARA0e- I I 2 B .J Il.l - 8 u. 0 11l ~ 8 v J 8 2 ~ . ill 8 i: if) I t ~ Il\ ~ _Ir ,~ "" ;,iI 0::> 'N3dSV ,'N3lVa's OEl >iel3l:J A10 E?X,:ttt County of Pitkin ' ) ) ss. ) ,:,", ... AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY POSTING OF A VARIANCE HEARING BEFORE THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Pursuant to Section 2-22 (c) of the Municipal Code) State of Colorado fOllows: The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and say~ as I,'; " , . j.p', h, 1. I DALE POTVIN f_______________________________ , being or . representing an Applicant', h.efore the City of Aspen Board of ". ;.:: Adjustment, personally ce'rttfy that the attached photograph '.. ..~. . fairly and accurate,ly represents .the sign posted as Notice of the , variance hearing on thfs 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 posteJa"d lIis.l,ble continuously " ,thir-d, __ from the twenty-fourth day of . August, , _ . . , 87 , 19_. (Must be posted for , c.'\" ." ..". at least ten ClO) !jull days before the-.hearing date). I~ aJ , 19~, to the day of ~, Septe.mber.._ ".1 and sworn to before day of September . DALE POTVIN me , (Attach photograph her~) . WITNESS MY HAND SEAL. :..... ....\0. .'J~' My commission '" . . \'. N~ta~j. ~ AiIW=e&s " "" i;;,\(;:J:t~ '"" ./ AFFIDAVIT I, W I I ford B. Fu I tz, do hereby state that I was the owner of the residence at 320 West Bleeker in Aspen, Colorado from approximately 1972 untl I I sold It to Dale A. Potvin and Sally AI len-Potvin in 1982. I recleved the property as a part of the estate of my parents who bu I I t the home and carport In 1962. I was faml liar with the property during my parents ownership as wel I as whl Ie I owned It. Since construction In 1962 the carport had an east side wall that was connected to the northeast corner of the house. This sidewall remained In existence during both my ownership and the ownership of my parents. (]JAB By: Wilford B. Fultz Fultz 01 I Company 6000 Western Place, Suite 120 Fort Worth, Texas 76107 STATE OF -;;tl1.s COUNTY OF '-r;,,e,e;1A11 The foregoing Affidavit was subscribed and sworn to before me this dig#- day of July, 1987, by Wilford B. Fultz. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ~./ ,0~ Notary Pub i I c My commlslon expires: [SEAL] 3bohR I , ^ , ,. " , ,,~,./ ....,'v' T ADDUNE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAw PAUL J. TAOQUNE AsPEN PRoFESSIONAL BUlLOING OFFlCES: 600 EAST HOPKINS p,o. Box 9978 ASPEN. CO 81612 (303) 925-9190 FREDERICK W. GANNETT ERIN F. HAZEN OF COUNSEL CITY HAll. OFFICES: 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 (303) 925.2020 September 22, 1987 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Board of Adjustment City of Aspen Re: Resolution regarding variance for Potvin's, Restrictive Covenant Dear Remo: Enclosed for your review and signature is a resolution prepared by Joe Edwards regarding the Potvin variance. I have reviewed the resolution and believe that it satisfies procedural requirements and accurately reflects the Board's actions in this matter. Also enclosed is a copy of a restrictive covenant, signed by the Potvin's, restricting the use within the variance to access- ory buildings. I have filed the original with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder Office. ~ tt ity Attorney FWG/fg Enc. 3. The owners shall prepare and place of record a covenant running with the land reflecting these conditions and limitations on the uses and structures within the variance hereby granted. Dated: September , 1987. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REMO LAVAGNINO, Chairman 04/19 -2- .__^--~~_I , , ,..... '- "'" - ALLEi r:7 L K. t'? <? 750oq' I I" E:- O(X)' -- l=DJNO. J<:~ <If P,-^, CAt' . )..,'7, =1';1 "-" 1------ I \ I I I 7.(,' '3,~ 74' I-_~~~"'""_L~ "-.. WA~~ ';'~E."" 0 (P5' / I I I I GARAse. I I I I '2 B -.J u.l - 8 LL ~ III ~ 8 v ~ 8 '2 ~ . 8 1: III \{l LL, ".. .' ,1 ~, -~ t-.- ..,.~ ,. ..-....;J " . ,~ I,. l - ......... ; ~, 'I .. ~ ,it ~ " I~: ~\ r\ v.. ;... I~ tJ...J' <';' ;.'~ \, ..--.j ..:-.....,...:. ~.. : ~~ i I, '! '~"'~' ~ ,I, " t~ I '\ ~' 'I ( ,\.. I I I I I I I \ .. " j -+ "" '\ ,I '~ !',..'" , ~ "I I ~ , 'I", \', t,' f " ',: """" "".,I-,/":.,'i:'i1" , ,',' ~,... ': ",.~Jt:.l,"', ;~"I ~...^" ;,l:~\:; -",-,.- "'~_";',.', ...;:;r , , ,,' -"-~--,_.._- I ' " .,,~~~.\:f~. ' ~:';""~;':,~.~;'"":"'.".'t e. 0\ Ji~ ~'~ i1 .~ , , ~: r ~ 1(' f "J~o\ ~fr t.J1,. ";1 6~ b ~ ~, L.- ~ ~Jt'f'-G\~ -\; ~. ~,~ ~ "',. l:. f",l) , . "t- ~ '- ~ ~ I' ~ :::-1-,(\\ '" ~. Jo,' ~ ~ ) ~ it ~ ~ ~. t t~' .~ ~ l~ S> ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ )0.. '+.. 1- J <-. - ~ ;;--... :II "',... <...'" ~:'" (\ '\;J~=-' ~ '-I ~' ......:;:-. -.\\ ~. '\ (' ~~ ~~ ~~ ,. f' ,'k . ~ .. , ~ t. ') 0 't .", ',. ::::: \1;1 ft, . < ' i~ ~~ .:,\ ',)' ~'\ ,', "I> . ~ ..J:. ~- ,... .~-~~,~, ' -~-f t--~ ~ ~ ~" .,..., -, .. -I. l\ I- :t '0;:' ~ <4 ') I, ~ ~ ;:t ) ') I' 1'- ... ) ,i\' ~ 0:' ~ ~ il' , ....... n ;)..., ~ " ~ '" ~ "'~ ":!-> In' ,~ .., ~, " II t .. "", " - ~ ...... .... '" --;, AI ~ . '\ , " . h ~ - - <.1 ' t , t ~ '" ~ ::::: ~ 'i ., I I I I I I I .1_ r , }:;l l., ~ ::,.. '"', . I ,,1,4 I to'l' ; "" ,,' ',I"~ ~;'rf.t; ;~ , . ,'..., \', ' ", ~~, I ::.'.' ',,,:" Ll! " ':: ::;;'j ~ ~'i I' :,'~;'I;::', ~' ~ ~ fl..:',i~'''t( p ~ '. .1'1 ,~! f< r ~ \,~I::i,l<i,;; ~' ,(t-l' \ ,',' :;'" ) ; . ';t.~i' .':" '~ ~ 'u~ ,'\ <.. ) l\- f'.\\'::;L 'I' i.f " -y; .', ,,:J."_; ,~,:, U~ " """! """;:1\'''''' ; . . '1 '~., . " , , r" I:" , ,: ,... , ~ .' ~ ":; I" ' J:.n ,,'...1.:,;\"" " _ \"r, 0 ,. " - , ,:: -lt~l';~'1 <::, I,:.,,;. ,:;:~' : '. ''': I'" ~,.. .~;,>~.. ...;m .l, ,1. ' f' ,'~ ~, ~l J) s, 'f<t .,- N ..t: - ...J " (;';" -l -, ... 'Jl" ,'<11--: ,- ~ - .. ---- -.- -. ".' . " , . .'Ll '. , i , . ,""..: ' , ,,',' . . ! , " . ,,~, .. .: .,', , : '. "'l>: ';:;1,\:,::.-~' ',1' ,\~~: ; ,:>i.:,:,'.;'~"~: i,~'.;; . ,\" t. . ""..; , ..f,.. ", '~'i.~' . I' ~" ! '" .t .J. <l " . r ,I"'; - ~ .', il U ~ " ... " ,';' ~:'. j'" ". ,: .'\' I~. ' ....- t":1 - --, 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I, , II II II II II ,','; ";;:"#:' ',,: . .1.,- ,';~~ ,'OIl ..P....,~-~" ", , " , . ",I ", .,J", ,~.', .<, " ~; :_:1.~ }'I' '~Wi;-' ,,' I~~ ': , . ,',I ' , '1 ",.:., I ',' , ~'rl.,~!.;.~:l, ,..:."...,--~',.,: I, II II II II I, I.: I I, " 1'fI!'. .",.; . 'l":"'~~~~ . .....-... -------- -. ~" , . "'~:'1 --,'1 .~... - .. . ~~~ ~., _~~!o"" .~~..,..+~, _-:' ',";~ '.-t;~~ ~ ", ~~ ".-', '" '_ ..-i~~-,.-=! -:n!'" ,:.' ,'4;:)./ D:"... .1 ~~,~~~~~ ~ ' I - ',~ -:: .~~ ;:.:; .~~- _.. ,.,.....lh} _-...~ " -... ,~.. ~ ..~ '. ,;/' , " c. ." ..... ,~.... " , ,''-:-~'".~ . "'... ~..;- ' ." ~ . . ~, ''J' ~" . ." '. .... ~ -...:....::...I.-~ " - <,!>';-'tt ~ ~,~ .. . ," , , " .' -,' -#_" r - /. 'FL'IN IT' 'H , r,~('o ''')-1:."' C :Rl.. x. I~r.;, C fi 1 r 1118' I' t" O\'O#367'J P I'~'-'l ~Ecrr:'l) ,6. .10 '::l,JII-:C $6 ro I, .. ~ ~ "" ~~~ ~ ,'-- ~~" "'- ,">;;;" , " .J , .. .. '- ~ ~ j,d t ~~tJP ~i'1J1P j. p ~ u '" . . ..: l (\l I . z . . <, .... u, <= .' '" . 0 <= . III . . > . 0 , u . . III . .;; ~ I . I .... u 0 ~ , .... . , .... c .... '" III 0<: .; ,; ..: . . c . . . z c . . o ~ . . . .... o bO <= .... "tl .... o o ,Ill 0<: -- <= .... > .... o Po< Ii: o I.L :.\..i.' . ':'_'"'._' <::1- ~IS N_ O> " 00 -- "" -' -- '" LD N '" OO~ N 0 o o '" cr " .J .J o o I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I . I . I .. Qj:: I lJ) 10 I I o ...:fa; I 0:: ;: zi I <( :5:> 0 I ::> 0 %0 I fi~~~~ 0 W>OOzg 3. ~ ~....O 0 . 0:: ZOU P W OU;N . ~:> 'Z ;;! 1J:<mm 1-0 0. 2~ '" ill '" W "..;.... Ul t ro o ~ ::1 .., 0 ~ 01 Z 0: .., o o . \0 '" I" ~ '" >- ..: a. "'~ "", .0 O~"- >-00 ----~-j 0: .., vi 0 a: ..; 3: 0 '" W J: a. J '" ill 0 .., .... III "tl .... o o III 0<: I ~ t'- 0 ~ 0 c.D ..: m a: t 0 .... i.D 0 u 0 ;i 0 w I "- .. '" ,- ..: IU1 'oJ ;C.D '" - z ..: 0 lD - .... nJ ..: '0 z 0 ! - ;:: .. <( z .J... '" . a: , ii: I Ul I , :I: " ... <<l ~ .... III .-i U >. .... g o u <= .... ~ .... .... LPo< ---- ~ ~ ...,-------.. , " '~ RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ~ THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT is made S0'PTI::-", ~ 1987, by DALE POTVIN and SALLY POTVIN, owners of Lots N, Block 43, City of Aspen, a/k/a 320 West Bleeker. WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment of the City of Aspen on September 3, 1987, case number 87-9, granted a variance for Lots Nand 0, Block 43, City of Aspen, to allow an enclosed garage to extend seven feet, eight inches into the IS-foot rear-yard setback in the R-6 zone subject to the limitation that the structure within the setback shall be utilized only for accessory uses associated with a single-family residence and that no second story shall be allowed within the setback. 15 , o and ~ j I THEREFORE, the owners of Lots Nand 0, Block 43, City of Aspen, hereby covenant and agree for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns as a covenant running with the land enforcible by the City of Aspen, that the uses within the seven-foot, eight-inch setback variance shall be limited to accessory uses to a single-family dwelling and that no second story structure shall be allowed within the setback variance area. A copy of a plat prepared by Alpine Surveys, Inc., Box 1730, Aspen, Colorado 81612, Job Number 87-59, which shows the garage extension into the setback, is attached hereto as Exhibit A. ~~-~. SA!.; y' P IN- 0 ~ J , I I , I 1 , i I I , I Dated: ~~ Q\v.) IS \ Q'b1- , 1987. , S OF COLORADO ) ) ss. ) COUNTY OF PITKIN Acknowledged before me September Is-. 1987, by DALE POTVIN and SALLY POTVIN. My conunission expires _Jf2tJ~ /? /t7?? Witness my hand and official seal. i2ftlrr;~ ~~/J1j~jJ;o tary Pu ~ , B g 111 .~ 2 . "Ij- z I ] . ,...... C'\LLEi r? L K. f"? , "" 75ooq'll"E: wOQ?' ~~. l'"OVNO' I<:~ >V 1"1.-4.. c,' . 1-.'7. 'Z01!51 ........... I I n, <J.cP '1.4; _ l':Q:::F Ov'ERHAN:;,. I _ ' ______-1- -l O~ / I WAL-L "1-l1c..KNg.~ O.CP51 I I I I J u,' ,------ I I I I I GARA0fS. . i " D' .-J 111 - . u. 5 ~ 8 v 8 ~ ~ It] 8 to ~ ~ I I ~ - I l)- I ~ 't ~ ~ 0 ! I 1\\ I I ) N 0 I I ......... N 7?" 01' J I" yV woCO' . ....--... FOON D' R~~A". wi P'-^. ( I-~. :201~1 EXHIBIT A I?LE.E.\"'\Ef'. 7if'.CE.T ---..--1 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMEN'l' JULY 16. 1987 4:00 P.M. AGENDA I. ROLL CALL II. MINUTES OF JULY 2, 1987 III. OLD BUSINESS Case 187-9 / Dale & Sally Potvin rv. ADJOURNMEN'l' ..--..- .-._-..........~-----,.-" .'._._-~_.-..........~--,...-....-..-----. '0: o #" -', / RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS JULY 2. 1987 Chairman Remo Lavagnino called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken with all members present. MINUTES OF MAY 28. 1987 Josephine Mann made a motion to approve the minutes of May 28, 1987. . Charlie Paterson seconded the motion with all in favor. CASE 187-9 / DALE & SALLY POTVIN After discussion pertaining to the posting' of this case, the Board decided to table this case to date:certain of July 16, 1987. Charlie made a motion to postpone this case to July 16, 1987. Anne Austin seconded the motion with all in favor. CASE 187-7 / THO~~S & HARRIET. LARKIN Harriet Larkin: I gave you all a new copy 9f the survey in which I shaded the setback on our lot. I appeared before this Board on May 28, 1987 and I feel that my presentation was not clear enough about the unnecessary hardship of the l;ayout of the lot. I brought this in to show what a large portion of our lot is in setback. Our front line is 181 feet long on the street and 100 feet on the side and 140 feet in the back. The whole lot is 8,082 sq ft. The setbacks take over 5,000 sq ft of the lot. This is more than 2/3 of the lot. This leaves just 1/3 of the lot to build upon. According to the information the Board of Adjustments gave me, the decision on whether to grant a variance is based on Section 2-22(d) items 1,2,3 & 4 page 156 of the Aspen Municipal Code which states these valid reasons for granting a variance. 11. "The special conditions and circumstances do not result from action of the applicant." Clearly the unusual shape of this lot with 181 frontage was done when the subdivision was platted and is not of our making. 12. "Special or'. extraordinary circumstances apply to the 1 ".'.. ....~....... subject property that. do not apply similarly ,to the other properties in the same vicinity or zone." The .ther lots in Calderwood do not have such large frontages on the ~treet and are not penalized by such extreme amounts of footage. and setbacks. Some of the lots have 30 ft frontage, some are 40 ft and some are 50 ft frontage. We should be entitled to what other property owners in this same area have. They lose much less of their lots due to setbacks and their lots are smaller. The granting of a variance will not adversely affect the purpose of the comprehensive plan. No property owners notified have objected and the ones in the immediate area who would be affected the most have been very supportive. I have letters from neighbors on both sides of me who are supporting this request and more who are here today in support of this request. The only variance I am asking is 15 feet instead of 30 feet on the street side. Remo asked for comments from the Board. Ron Erickson: Are you moving this garage closer to the house so that it is 10 ft from the house now? Harriet: It has to be at least 10 feet from the house. If it is attached the setback is 10 feet. If it is an accessory building, its setback is 5 feet. Remo asked for comments from the public. Susan Resnick: I live about 3 houses down from this property and i can't imagine why they would not get this variance. They have more greenery than anybody else in our neighborhood. It is a fairly congested area but their's is certainly the most open. I think the impact from this would be minimal. Olaf Edstrom: The Larkins are very responsible, respectful people who wouldn't think of doing anything to harm the neighborhood. I, as a resident, am concerned about 2 particular things in the community; fairness and the maintenance of the appearance in our community. Number 1, I don't think this would be an objectionable structure. Number 2, I think it grossly. unfair to deny the variance because of the unique form of their property compared to all the others. The failure to provide the variance would, I think, be grossly unfair to them. .John Hayes of 1112 Waters: I can see no unfavorable impact whatsoever from this proposed variation. On the contrary the amount of open space they have around their house and the siting of the garage as they propose would seem to us to maintain the allure of that particular part of Waters Avenue. Pete McClain of 1110 Waters: I am here on behalf of Harriet 2 ~ . ,. ~ J f I I , L "...,... , ""- Larkin. I think that any improvement like this on the cuI de sac, you should not even have to think about. . It would be getting automobiles off the street and it would b~ a tremendous improvement to the whole cuI do sac and I think that everybody who lives there feels the same way. I can't imagine why the City would even think about turning down a variance like this. Those automobiles being off the street would make' it simpler in the winter to have the street plowed. I think it woul d be a real nice improvement to the whole cuI do sac and I hope that you find in favor of this variance and let the Larkins take care of it right away. Remo asked for further public comments. There were none and he closed the public portion of the meeting. Letters from 'Richard Lewis and Lesl ie Holst were. then read into the record as attached. Both were in support of this variance. Josephine Mann: I said last time that I thought the shape of the lot was a real hardship. Now we are told almost 2/3 of the lot is in setbacks not to be built upon. This re-enforces my feeling that this is a real hardship. I spent a lot of time looking at that today because I had said last time that garages are not a necessity. We have to really think hard about granting such a variance and so I .went back and looked at that to see if I could agree with what I had said last time about thinking that this would not fit in with the spirit of the general plan. I decided I would change that because of the amount of space there. They have a larger lot than many of the other people do. That would be one thing that would be an advantage. It is also an advantage to get another vehicle off the street. I am also very favorably impressed with how the neighborhood feels about this and so I am willing to grant this variance. Rick Head then asked to excuse himself from this application because of a conflict of interest. Ron Erickson: I would be in favor of granting a minimal variance which would mean moving the garage 10 feet from the building, move it back 3 feet on the lot so that it would not be inside the setback. Remo: to the get in You have to remember the reason that they couldn't move it minimum variance was they couldn't turn the car around to to that side. After much further discussion, meeting was temporarily adjourned to the Larkin property in order to get an on-site study of this variance application. The time was 5:20 pm. The meeting was re-opened on the Larkin Property at 5:35 pm. This on~site study resulted in a motion made b~ Francis Whitaker which 3 . ",., -' ' ',...... would grant to allow garage to be set against rea~ yard setback line 16 ft width and 20 ft from rear yard setbacK line towards street frontage and corner. Charlie Paterson seconded the motion. Roll Call: Charlie Paterson, yes, Anne Austin, yes, Francis Whitaker, yes, Josephine Mann, yes, Remo Lavagnino, no. Deputy Clerk J 4 / Building Department 506 E. Main Aspen. CO 81611 E 23.36' of lot D W 13.54' of lot E Block 50 Building Department 506 E. Main Aspen. CO 81611 ...... ~ / Buil ding Departillent 506 E. Main Aspen. CO 81611 = ::::::-.:j --..-- -~ --____ J ---- ~------ - ---ill ~. r~'1\\ R~ ~ John S. Lizzo c/o LaSalle Comm. Brokerage 200 N. Michigan Avenue Suite 6 Chicago IL 60601 1.J1"lllll.II..II.II..111I1.111 (tN, . " " " JUN 16 -0 . FM , 1~~1 &'F.\\~ - c '- ,I, J ,.-.-"- ~:...4.- -~ /1,S ADDRESR""" ';[8 EXPfRi:r)..... UNCr! FDG'\-\,- Elisha Svea Estate of- 315 East Main Street l - ::.... -- ---~ . - ----....~ -=:~ =- - ':I --:I --'-------....... - - --- - '1 ~ II :'/At~ t Building Department 506 E. Main Aspen, CO 81611 FOX FOX ~'r.=' 4,.J ;'./)1.9L86;t F<ETUF<N TO 8ENDEI'< E::OX CLO!3E,:O Nelson Fm: P. O. Bm' 2425 Aspen CO 81612 Lots R, S Korth'> Blod 35 ~--"-"-"--'--- -~~-------- ~ddlfl9. 'Pell.4.rtment /.' 506 r:'"}fain fc~'. Aspen, CO 81611 i NO M;..IL RECEPTACLE Josef Uhl 320 W. Hallam Aspen CO 81611 Lots N, 0, P Blod 42 - -----------... ~... ----:!!!I ~.:; ~ ------ ~ ----- J;IiiI :& - - . .--.-~..,-..,:.... ~ ._-".-:- ;;i ---~.~-.... ," ---...."..,.:1ii ~ -~