Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.100sspring.009-80 r '" .- ~ ~ NanCE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case No. 80-9 BEFORE THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTHENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY Tr~~ 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, Colo- rado, (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.. YOlrviews<'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. t r. [ l The particulars of the hearing and of the requested variance are as follows: Date and Time of Meeting: Date: June 26, 1980 Time: 4 PM City Council Chambers Name and address of Applicant for Variance: Name: Neil Ross and Brian L. Goodheim Address: 100 S. Spring St. Aspen, CO Location or description of property: Location: 100 S. Spring St. Aspen, CO Description: Lot A, Block 28 East Aspen Townsite Variance Requested:. Application is made to build a new roof line on an existing building. The'proposed construction of the roof line will have no front yard setback. The required front yard is 10 feet. Sec. 24-3.4 Area and Bulk Requirements. O-Office di$trict. Duration of Variance: (Please cross out one) Temporary Permanent x THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT No to be represented by counsel. BY Remo Lavap;nino, Chairman by Sus~nJohn~on, Deputy City Clerk . . .... "....., ". APPEAt'TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTr~JT CITY OF ASPEN ~ - DATE 5-2.0-8D. APPELLANT t>1G\I... ~$ hJ:l~~.&b~DDRESS PHONE OWNER ADDRESS CASE NO. ?J()-~ (CJ2, S.~M"L(.\ ~< MP6J Cc,W8'(bl\ . - tJO<<... Bflt'ltJ.) . <U8-~oW q-2S~2.goo 9il... If 2. \-=-(S!.-g, '(:L{'- 'fS7,{, (~ . S, <;P~i'fJC, .~ P€fJ , , .' SOu-lj-{ S PI4N Cb ST ft-.sPE-tJ CoLoRI6l1 / . .. I "-oT f\. til-OC/L 1..'0 ~,As", brI. \'(>.o-''';S rtt? ) ~ lStreet & Number of Subdivision Blk. & Lot No.) LOCATION OF PROPERTY Building Permit Application and prints or any other pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part of CASE NO. ~o -9 THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOHING JUSTIFICATImlS: S E= E: A;-,-rIJ\-Q-le\:> /oI'-C-AlO riA-leu 2-0"" it-{ ~o 11-'--;) ~E' A- p~ o~ -(-\{'$ trP(J'-<'f.-A-\~O,J ~cM C ()Je'L'I:'ON ~UEAJcrI. I\-r(Cltl-r&T 7l . A. , COUNTY. TIiMURER \U ~ Of'- tW~\lS.1:"'GJ<: J C,lT-{ 6f' frsp--=...J, CJ 6 MAY2 11980 )fpl -/I' , I D 0< PITKIN COUNTY ASPEN. 00 Will you be represented by counsel ? Yes_NolL" ',., SIGNED: ~ Appell ant PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE FOR NOT GRANTING: REQUIRING THE BUILDING. INSPECTOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A~D REASON AppU.cation is made to build a new roof line on an existing building, The proposed construction of the roof line will have no front yard set back, The required front yard is 10 feli)t. Sec. 24-3.4 Area and Bulk Requirements. 0 Office district. Status Signed DECISION DATE DATE IF HEARINGiffAJ ~ ~b I 1'1~ SECRETARY .~~~~ 'C'.;,i\/ ":>'~/'J . . BF\!M. L GOOOHE1M. M.B.A., R .M. REALTOR, INSUGAN(T f'd;-:~"J:-:;-{ "'Re"<..,"';,L -;-O::~ ;.t..:;';:: p.:_::>._:'~::::::; (30]):925,.1552 ',,'-,-' ' . ,',,,' ,-.. '."" . .'1-,-- <.0 ~ ((0. lip. i 1-38-,4-9+9 GOODHEIM AND ROSS " r;srxrr'_ ::I"nVICFS 1 00 $nUTH Spr1ii\IC STR U:;:T /\~~PEI\J. COLOfl~DC B1611 . NEIL -ROSS (:JC,:;':' ~~,:::':<'f;UJ rm,10RNlOU~1 ~',' ~ ~,\;i~~\i::' CiG of I\s~kn " '.~i-~fi cegld9. P-epf, AHn: Carla 130 'ScuthGalena Street .Aspen, Colorado 81611 ~ ?, #:',:/1 /?;, If/'J~ //, ' rrolll:~rian Goorlheilll ;:.:A.L t.. I N.-/;~"- , rJei I Ross 1 . fJ--:;:Y .VW<. (~ ,,'r' "".' . ..,Dear Carla; 'requested, \1e have researched the ad,joi ni ng property ownership for our pending ication for a PilH unit on Lot A Block 2fl East J\spen Addition. adjoining property o,me1's are located on Exhihit A (attached) and are as follows;. '.l<',Property 1.; . ", ~ Property 5, .~ Property 6: ~. . ,-,. <, , < 2; Concept 600 Condominium Association ,c/o VILCOR 555 North Mill Street Aspen~,Colorado 81611 Eitate of Arthur Mikkelsen c/o Box 3132 ' Aspen, Colorado 81611 \:"\':" Ii .aD + 5" "-7" :~'(.. '. '<',';-'. ":; j.. . .; , :'.,,~':, 1'Sfj, '" Spr'ing Street Commercial Associates, A General 117 South Spring Street (~;u 5coLt and c/o Mel Aspen, Colorado 81611 Spri ng Street 'Associ ate~, 117 South Spring Street Aspen, ColoradO 81611 A General Partnership~ (c/o Sco t t) Co- ~. rJ!fIJ' Aspen Main Condominium Association (I)', . c/o Ms. Mary 80sley '-10 709 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Mr. Theodore L. and Ruth L. Mularz , Box 166 Aspen, Colorado 81611 7; Michael Otte and Richard Sherrif Box 11299 Aspen, Colorado 81611 If we may be of further' assistance, or provide additional information, please con- tact us. at 925-1558 or 925-2800. / u(t . b. \ 'i ..i ,. -Office' Building @ ~:" , " ;. ~.;. . I ! Nor th S,pring Sb:-c'ct I' I I I I Sinqlc Family RC.::;ic1L'nce Ctl . South Spring street -Eilst f.tl,lin Stre(~t- !5an~Bcd ~.n ~fj1f([j lLli))~~ll~UiTl till -ill lcy- Single Family I{(..:'[;id(~n(;c & Offices o Surrounding land Use ~je~ghborhood mf~~~j) ~"'''''~~,~-:!,''',..,.,..,,-c:.:!n.''~~ iEJi:hub8~ b\ @ Aspen Main Condominium I '/ . c welton anderson & associates . architects / planners . box 9946 / ospen ,colorodo 81611 / (303) 925.4576 " TOI Board of Adjustment, City of Aspen RE: Variance to allow construction of new roof over Goodheim-Ross Building, 100 S. Spring st., Aspen DATE I 20 May 1980 This,application is a request to build a new, differently shaped roof over the existing structure at the corner of Spring and Main; built in the 1880's, formerly housing Horsethief Kelly, and.more recently the Visiting Nurses (no correlation implied). Applications have been made, and all approvals granted, for a major expansion of the building which is to provide additional office space and a deed- restricted employee housing unit. Like many buildings of that vintage, it is nonconforming in respect to setbacks on two sides. When initial design was commenced, it was this Architect's interpretation of Section 24-12.) of the AMC, that the construction of the new roof line in question; which retains the existing eave lines, which contains no additional floor area, which does not encroach on setbacks any more than that which now exists I did not constitute an "increase in tne nonconformi ty~'. Today, the building inspector suggested I request a "minor variance" for the new roof. The existing building has a gable roof with a shed roof along it's side (please refer to drawings). The proposal is to center the ridge on the building, eliminating the shed roof to the East. This will raise the ridge loss than four feet, but still ten feet below the height limit in it's zoning district. Whether or not this constitutes an increase in nonconformity, construction of the new portion of the building will require a restructuring of the existing roof to support anticipated additional snow loads and greatly improved roof drainage. This proposal also will allow the two local businesses occupying this building to operate without interruption during construction. The aesthetics of the new roof line at this important intersection were also a consideration. Referral to sheet A-7 of drawings will graphically illustrate the modest nature of this request. The provisions of section 2-22(d)(1-4) "valid reasons for granting a variance", are applicable as .~ell. Your consideration of this matter shall be greatlF appreaciated. Sincerely, ( ( (;1}//!j; e1{)4~ c. Welton ~nderson, Architect cw/WA I , I,. c. welton anderson & associates architects / planners box 9946 / aspen, colorado 81611 / (303) 925.4576 . TOI Board of Adjustment, City of Aspen RE: Variance to allow construction of new roof over Goodheim-Ross Building, 100 S. Spring st., Aspen DATE: 20 May 1980 This, application is a request to build a new, differently shaped roof over the existing structure at the corner of Spring and Mainl built in the 1880's, formerly housing Horsethief Kelly, and.more recently the Visiting Nurses (no correlation implied). Applications have been made, and all approvals granted, for a major expansion of the building which is to provide additional office space and a deed- restricted employee housing unit. Like many buildings of that vintage, it is nonconforming in respect to setbacks on two sides. When initial design was commenced, it was this Architect's interpretation of Section 24-12.) of the AMC, that the construction of the new roof line in questionl which retains the existing eave lines, which contains no additional floor area, which does not encroach on setbacks any more than that which now exists I did not constitute an "increase in tne nonconformi ty~'. Today, the building inspector suggested I request a "minor variance" for the new roof. The existing building has a gable roof with a shed roof along it's side (please refer to drawings). The proposal is to center the ridge on the building, eliminating the shed roof to the East, Thi~ will raise the ridge less than four feet, but still ten feet below the height limit in it's zoning district. Whether or not this constitutes an increase in nonconformity, construction of the new portion of the building will require a restructuring of the eXisting roof to support anticipated additional snow loads and greatly improved roof drainage. This proposal also will allow the two local businesses occupying this building to operate without interruption during construction. The aesthetics of the new roof line at this important intersection were also a consideration. Referral to sheet A-7 of drawings will graphically illustrate the modest nature of this request. The provisions of section 2-22(d)(1-4) "valid reasons for granting a variance", are applicable as l~ell. Your consideration of this matter shall be greatl~ appreaciated. Sincerely, ( ( Wf./(J; f!t04b-- c. Welton ~nderson, Architect cl~/WA ! -;, c. welton anderson St. associates ., i .1 architects / planners . box 9946 / aspen. colorado 81611 / (303) 925.4576 TOI Board of Adjustment, City of Aspen RE: Variance to allow construction of new roof over Goodheim-Ross Building, 100 S. Spring st., Aspen DATE: 20 May 1980 This, application is a request to build a new, differently shaped roof over the existing structure at the corner of Spring and Mainl built in the 1880's, formerly housing Horsethief Kelly, and.more recently the Visiting Nurses (no correlation implied). Applications have been made, and all approvals granted, for a major expansion of the building which is to provide additional office space and a deed- restricted employee housing unit. Like many buildings of that vintage, it is nonconforming in respect to setbacks on two sides. When initial design was commenced, it was this Architect's interpretation of Section 24-12.3 of the AMC, that the construction of the new roof line in question; which retains the existing eave lines, which contains no additional floor area, which does not encroach on setbacks any more than that which nO~1 existsl did not constitute an "increase in tne nonconformity!'. Today, the building inspector suggested I request a "minor variance" for the new roof. The existing building has a gable roof with a shed roof along it's side (please refer' to drawings). The proposal is to center the ridge on the building, eliminating the shed roof to the East. This will raise the ridge less than four feet, but still ten feet below the height limit in it's zoning district. Whether or not this constitutes an increase in nonconformity, construction of the new portion of the building will require a restructuring of the existing roof to support anticipated additional snow loads and greatly improved roof drainage. This proposal also will allow the two local businesses occupying this building to operate without interruption during construction. The aesthetics of the new roof line at this important intersection were also a consideration. Referral to sheet A-7 of drawings will graphically illustrate the modest nature of this request. The provisions of section 2-22(d)(1-4) "valid reasons for granting a variance", are applicable as well. Your consideration of this matter shall be greatly appreaciated. s~ncerrlY, ( t (;1Jjj; evJ'b-- c. Welton ~nderson, Architect Cl~/WA i c. welton anderson & associates , "i I i -; . . architects / planners . box 9946 / aspen. colorado 81611 / (303) 925.4576 TO: Board of Adjustment, City of Aspen RE: Variance to allow construction of new roof over Goodheim-Ross Building, 100 S. Spring st., Aspen DATE: 20 May 1980 This. application is a request to build a new, differently shaped roof over the existing structure at the corner of Spring and Mainl built in the 1880's, formerly housing Horsethief Kelly, and.more recently the Visiting Nurses (no correlation implied). Applications have been made, and all approvals granted, for a major expansion of the building which is to provide additional office space and a deed- restricted employee housing unit. Like many buildings of that vintage, it is nonconforming in respect to setbacks on two sides. When initial design was commenced, it was this Architect's interpretation of Section 24-12.) of the AMC, that the construction of the new roof line in question; which retains the existing eave lines, which contains no additional floor area, which does not encroach on setbacks any more than that which no", exists; did not constitute an "increase in tli'e nonconformity~'. Today, the building inspector suggested I request a "minor variance" for the new roof. The existing building has a gable roof with a shed roof along it's side (please refer' to drawings). The proposal is to center the ridge on the building, eliminating the shed roof to the East. Thi8 will raise the ridge less than four feet, but still ten feet below the height limit in it's zoning district. Whether or not this constitutes an increase in nonconformity, construction of the new portion of the building will require a restructuring of the existing roof to support anticipated additional snow loads and greatly improved roof drainage. This proposal also will allow the two local businesses occupying this building to operate without interruption during construction. The aesthetics of the new roof line at this important intersection were also a consideration. Referral to sheet A-7 of drawings will graphically illustrate the modest nature of this request. The provisions of section 2-22(d)(1-4) "valid reasons for granting a variance", are applicable as Nell. Your consideration of this matter shall be greatlu appreaciated. s;-ncerplY, ,( (. (A) f/!J;- evA ~ C, Welton ~nderson, Architect c.~/WA ~' " " I I , "..../ ,....."'- '; ,. c. welton anderson & associates architects / planners . box 9946/ aspen. colorado 81611 / (303) 925.4576 . TO: Board of Adjustment, City of Aspen RE: Variance to allow construction of new roof over Goodheim-Ross BUilding, 100 S. Spring st., Aspen DATE: 20 May 1980 This, application is a request to build a new, differently shaped roof over the existing structure at the corner of Spring and Main, built in the 1880's, formerly housing Horsethief Kelly, and.more recently the Visiting Nurses (no correlation implied). Applications have been made, and all approvals granted, for a major expansion of the building which is to provide additional office space and a deed- restricted employee housing unit. Like many buildings of that vintage, it is nonconforming in respect to setbacks on two sides. When initial design was commenced, it was this Architect's interpretation of Section 24-12.) of the AMG, that the construction of the new roof line in question; which retains the existing eave lines, which contains no additional floor area, which does not encroach on setbacks any more than that which nO~1 exists; did not constitute an "increase in tne nonconformi ty~'. Today, the building inspector suggested I request a "minor variance" for the new roof. The existing building has a gable roof with a shed roof along it's side (please refer' to drawings). The proposal is to center the ridge on the building, eliminating the shed roof to the East. Thi~ will raise the ridge less than four feet, but still ten feet belo~ the height limit in it's zoning district. Whether or not this constitutes an increase in nonconformity, construction of the new portion of the building will require a restructuring of the existing roof to support anticipated additional snow loads and greatly improved roof drainage. This proposal also will allow the two local businesses occupying this building to operate without interruption during construction. The aesthetics of the new roof line at this important intersection were also a consideration. Referral to sheet A-7 of drawings will graphically illustrate the modest nature of this request. The provisions of section 2-22(d)(1-4) "valid reasons for granting a variance", are applicable as well. Your consideration of this matter shall be greatlu appreaciated. Sincerely, ( ( {;tJli(j; e\(}4~ c. Welton ~nderson, Architect c\~/WA ....~-., \ I .1 I I , '1 c. welton anderson 8<. associates ,. architects / planners . box 9946/ ospen ,colorodo 81611 /(303) 925.4576 TOI Board of Adjustment, City of Aspen REI Variance to allow construction of new roof over Goodheim-Ross BUilding, 100 S. Spring st., Aspen DATE I 20 May 1980 This,application is a request to build a new, differently shaped roof over the existing structure at the corner of Spring and Main; built in the 1880's, formerly housing Horsethief Kelly, and.more recently the Visiting Nurses (no correlation implied). Applications have been made, and all approvals granted, for a major expansion of the building which is to provide additional office space and a deed- restricted employee housing unit. Like many buildings of that vintage, it is nonconforming in respect to setbacks on two sides. When initial design was commenced, it was this Architect's interpretation of Section 24-12.3 of the AMC, that the construction of the new roof line i~ question; which retains the existing eave lines, which contains no additional floor area, which does not encroach on setbacks any more than that which now exists; did not constitute an "increase in tne nonconformity~'. Today, the building inspector suggested I request a "minor variance" for the new roof. The existing building has a gable roof with a shed roof along it's side (please refer' to drawings). The proposal is to center the ridge on the bUilding, eliminating the shed roof to the East. Thi8 will raise the ridge less than four feet, but still ten feet below the height limit in it's zoning district. Whether or not this constitutes an increase in nonconformity, construction of the new portion of the building will require a restructuring of the existing roof to support anticipated additional snow loads and greatly improved roof drainage. This proposal also will allo~1 the tom local businesses occupying this building to operate without interruption during construction. The aesthetics of the new roof line at this important intersection were also a consideration. Referral to sheet A-7 of drawings will graphically illustrate the modest nature of this request. The provisions of section 2-22(d)(1-4) "valid reasons for granting a variance", are applicable as Hell. Your consideration of this matter shall be greatlF appreaclated. S,incerrlY, (' (. (;t) [/(j; evA ~ C. Welton ~nderson, Architect c\~/WA imet/eull J'umTlf ItzsIJtttllee (!,{}IJjl "'MERICAN FJlM'~~ MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY AMfRICAN STANDA~D INSURANCE <::OMPANY OF WISCONSIN AM,RICAN FAMilY liFE ''''SURAN'! COMPANY AMERICAN fAMilY FINANCIAl SERVices. INC MADISON, WISCONSIN 53701 l\TcU Rr;ss 048-.'704 :-,'~ .j"::' 1 J DATL__ SUBJECT"".~'" REf. NO..... ....'__cx?~fl) fi C..:':, .__.r _'_ I '~: .. ,...~,t.,.~~)....~...*,"~""" __ __ _....(WHEN REPLYING PLEASE REFER TO THIS SUBJECT AND NUMBER} _ " u~~_~u#~n~u ~.~~m u~n Lnm_ _._ _ -...' , _., ,_~ d j()JLm~n5:J. --_.~Ct..~....~.~..~, _.!z.=/q~ItJ..~.~jQ,_ . J..~. ..~n~~n~nnnmn..n. ,..n .~.m~n~}n~ i~r~ ~.._~~ _ . . m nmm mu.m......n --- ------------------ ------------------ -- n __~..~n~Tn4~dl-IO ~~~~~. m._~i/; 1e.&1_ ij...G.'b,;).~.. - -- -_.-- -------.......--.------- -------..--" .m._.~Q.__6?~.~~. _ m0-'<..~.~&.n~~.1~ (f,fp,__ u .mu m~u~n . ummu ... tA.4 f7vI.. /J~ --------_:~--) --~~--------- ~~ ---- -_.,~----------------------------- . ~~. .,_~rJfEL ,r-.-1 - ~