The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutlanduse case.boa.117sspring.018-77 - '-' -..." ,,"'" NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case No. 77-18 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, 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, yo~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 o,vners 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 14, 1977 4:00 PM Name and address of Applicant for Variance: Name: Address: Spring Street Associates 117 South Spring Street Location or description of property: Location: 117 South Spring Street Description: Fractional Lot 8 and all Lot 9, Glock 29, East Aspen Additional Townsite and Fractional Lot H, Block 98, City and Townsite of Aspen Variance Requested: Application is made for a building permit to build a two-family dwelling in the C-l Zoning District. The C-l Zoning district requires that 25 percent of the lot area must be in open space. The proposed project would have the continuity of the open space broken by an 18 foot wide driveway to a parking garage and part of the open space that is open to the DWatJ.cffi'uO<f wfi\yh~e~eet('j!>qEijlase cross out one) ~In'JN.'~~ Permanent THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BY clUl(,~&~1 6J~~"/l'( I Chairman C'f ' /1 i. ltc,'LL'I>i I "('-.-K.C'\ {'-1-' dcv ,- -, . l r~PPEI\.L TO BOARD OF ZON lIlG ADJUSTt"iEllT CITY OF ASPEN CASE NO, '11-)9 J lJA Hu;runa2..:4 ' q77 APPELLAIH ..sw:,i.ng..._Stteat-Aasociatf>S ADDRESS 117 SOl1rn !';pri ng !';rrppL__ _-_u_~----u_-------p HO N E -5)2,5-1216 -----~~--- OHNER l'ame ____---------------/\ D D RES S Same --_.._~--- ----_...- ~----------~- --- -~-~- -------- ---- LOCATION OF PROPERTY 117_E-9uth ~l':in9..-Etre~L Fractional Lot 8 and all Lot 9, Block 29, East Aspen Addi tional Townsite and Fraction_Cil Lot ,JL., Block 98, Ci t.Y..A.nd \Street & 'lumber of Subdivision I3lk. & Lot No,) Townsite of Aspen 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 EXCEPTIOIl SFO\mlG JUSTIFICATIOnS: See attached description Will you be represented by counsel ? YeS____NJjx~ ~ ~r --- SIGNED: . Ap ell nt -- ---------- -----~------ -------- PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND RE/\SON ' FOR NOT GRANTING: -----_._.----~--- Application is made for a building permit to build a two-family dwelling in the c-l Zoning District. The C-l Zoning district requires that 25% of the lot area must be in open space. Open space is defined as a portion of a building site, one side of which shall be open to the street unobstructed from ground level to the sky with the exception of permitted architectural projectio above ground level and which space shall not be used for storage, swimming pools and other recreation areas, trash area, rear access area, parking or structures of any nature except fountains, pathways, fences and landscaping. Open space further requires that the space which is open to the streE be at least one-half of the dimension of that side of the building site, that the open space be at least 10 feet deep and that the open space be continuous and not obstructed with building appurtenances and appendage~ The preposed project would have the continuity of the open space broken by an 18 foot wide driveway to a parking garage and_~~~t oi-_the ___-----' -STa [II S- -- ----------- --'-----5 r,jr1ed--- ' (Ove] P[R~\l T RE,)[Cl ~'11, D/\T[____ _n DECISION ,~-__---D/\H--_------ /\i'PLlCATIOtl FILED____ ___u_ O,HE H IIUd<lNG ----------------- ;' ~ . I I [) , ',[C R l' T ,\ I Y ,..-. ~ ....... ~",; . . open space that is open to the street would only be 9 feet deep. Sec. 24-3.7(d) Open Space Requirement. r H. Meyri g uilding Inspecto J; I ~ DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOWING JUSTIFICATIONS Applicant seeks a variance from the strict application of the Building Inspector's decision and determination of the open space requirements under Sec. 24-3-7 (d) (2) and (4) based upon applicant's preliminary plans that the 18 foot driveway portion crossing the open space area to the underground parking garage is unqualified as open space and, further, that it disqualifies the balance of the Spring Street open space to the north of driveway as being un- continuous. Justifications for the variance are: 1. Private driveways crossing open space areas are not directly or indirectly prohibited by the code - as are certain other uses and activities, which are specifically prohibited thereby. Therefore, the 18 foot private driveway portion should be counted; and it likewise follows that the rest of the open space to the north should count also. 2. Applicant has approximately 300 additional, un- counted square feet of open space along Spring Street to the south besides the existing building. This extra open space, while only 9 feet deep, ought to be counted as it will be fully landscaped with new trees, grass, shrubbery, etc. 3. Applicant's practical difficulty with the Building Inspector's determination of the open space requirement directly relates to its plan to construct underground parking. Access thereto is available only from spring street, which is where street front open space must be. Therefore, the strict enforcement of the Building Inspector's determination of the open space requirement will result in an unnecessary hardship to applicant and make it impossible for it to provide underground parking, which is a feature of the project that ~ is beneficial to the public interest. Applicant further observes that its proposed residential building constitutes a less intensive use of the land than is otherwise permitted in the C-l zone. Therefore, applicant submits that a variance or modification of the Building Inspector's decision or inter- pretation of the open space requirements applying to this project will, in the face of these practical difficulties, avoid an unnecessary hardship for applicant and, in fact, better further the spirit of the zoning ordinance and benefit the public welfare by way of making it possible for applicant to construct the underground parking. -2- theodore I. mularz. AlA. architects 119 south spring street. aspen, colorado 81611 phone 303/925-3365 warren I. palmer, associate 7 July 1977 Mr. Charles Paterson, Chairman The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Case No. 77-18 Spring Street Associates 117 South Spring Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Charlie: This letter Is In response to the Notice of Public Hearing for the variance requested for the above property which Is across the alley from our new build- Ing. Dr. and Mrs. Schiff and I have no objection to your granting the variance provided the following conditions are met: 1. A sidewalk should be built In conjunction with the new construction. The foot traffic In this area has Increased appreciably, creating a muddy mess In the summer after a rain and an equally messy situation In the winter with an unmalntalned path. 2. A landscape plan, with an assurance of proper maintenance, should be submitted and be a requirement of the project. 3. The existing office building on this site Is set back from the alley approximately ten feet allowing parking for two cars maximum, If they are parked parallel to the building. Currently the building occupants are angle parking In this space, not only blocking the alley, but making access to our off-street parking area difficult. This is a situation that should be cleared up since the addition of a two family dwelling can only serve to compound the problem. -< 7 July 1977 Mr. Charles Paterson, Chairman page 2 4. Space should be provided for the trash dumpster which Is presently kept at the street curb where a sidewalk should be. Currently the property Is poorly maintained, If at all, and Dr. and Mrs. Schiff and I would hate to see this compounded by additional density. If, however, the above conditions can be met, we would encourage your granting the variance, since it would help clean up the corner of Spring and Main as well as the alley. Sincerely, THE HOPKINS STREET VENTURE 0<..<.. rn~ Theodore L. Mularz, AlA Manager TLM:as cc: Dr. and Mrs. Samuel B. Schiff Clayton H. Meyring, Chief Bldg. Inspector City of Aspen , LIST OF ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OIVNERS ADJACENT TO SPRING STREET ASSOCIATES Name Address 1. Theodore L. Mularz and Samuel B, Schiff c/o Ted Mularz 119 South Spring Street 632 East Hopkins P. O. Box 166, Aspen, Colorado 81611 2. Grace Condon 624 East Hopkins Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 3. Playhouse Company, a Colorado partnership c/o Donald G, Swales 625 East Main Street p, O. Box 1884 Aspen, Colorado 81611 4. Aspen Valley Visiting Nurses Association, Inc. 100 Spring Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 william L. Rice, Personal Representative Estate of Alice Masterson, Deceased 604 Republic Building Denver, Colorado 80202 <:. (J.;d~ ~.J Jon K. Mulford, Esq, Attorney for Estate of Alice Masterson, Deceased 600 East Hopkins, Suite 305 Aspen, Colorado 81611 ~ ~".....v 5. Concept 600 Building % Vilcor, Inc. Pat Palangi, Vice President 600 East Main Street (Vilcor) 555 North Mill Aspen, Colorado 81611 7 July 1977 Mr. Charle. Paterlon, ChaIrman Th. CIty of Alpen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street Alpen, Colorado 81611 Rei ca.e No. 77-18 SprIng Stre.t Aaloclatea 117 South SprIng Stteet Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Charllel This letter Is In re8pon.. to ths Notlc. of PublIc H.arlng for the varl.nce reque.ted for the above property which Is acro.. the .Iley from our new build- Ing. or. and Mr.. Schiff .nd I have no obJ.ctlon to your gr.ntlng the varl.nce provIded the followIng condltlonl are metl 1. A sldew.lk should be built In conjunction wIth the new constructIon. The foottraf'Ic In thla area h.s Incr....d apprecl.bly, creatIng a muddy me.e In the .ummer after a rain and an equally me..y .Itu.tlon In the wInter with an unmalntalned path. 2. A I.ndac.pe plan, wIth .n as.urance of proper maintenance, .hould be submItted .nd be a requIrement of the project. 3. The exlltlng office buildIng on thla site I. let b.ck from the .lley .pproxlm.tely ten feet .,Iowlng p.rklng for two c.r. m.xlmum, If th.y are parked parallel to the buildIng. Currently the building occupant. are angl. parking In thl. Ipace, not only blOCking the alley, but making .cee.. to our off-Itr.et parking area difficult. Thll II a Iltu.tlon th.t Ihould be cleared up alnce the addition of a two f.mlly dwelling can only aerve to compound the problem. 7 Ju" 1977 Mr. Char'ea Patenon, Chairman ,.,e 2 .. Space ahould be provided for the trash dUMPater which Is praaentl, kept at the streat curb where a sidewalk ahould be. Currentl, the property la poorl, maIntained. If at al'. and Dr. and MTa. Schtff and 1 would hate to a" thh c..,ounded by addItional den.lty. If, hown,r, the a"va condttloftl can be .at, .a would encourage your ,rant I", the vartance, elnee It .ould help clean up the corn.r of Sprint and Main a. .ell a. the al'ey. 8lMerel,. THE HOPKIN8 STREET VENTURE c;/m Theodore L. Mularz, AlA _na,er TLM ... eel Dr. and MTa. Sa...el Clayton H. Neyrlng. 8. setliff / Chief 8ldg. Inapaetor City of Aapen ",--'-" ,.... -.....,.... flf'f'I:!I,L TO J30.~lm OF ZO:J111G P.DJUSTI'iEllT CITY OF AS!'UJ lJATE,Jun~ 21,__19-1L CASE NO. __:lI:.L?~__ A I' P [L Lf\ I~ TSpr ing_Strec_LAasociates.__AD D I{ E S S __ _ll7_S.o,uth..5pring_5treet _u_ . ___,_,_____, _ ________.____1'11 0 N E --925.:-_12J.L-_ QI'JIl [ R ?91n~,_._____ ____ .____..._ ,____ ADD R F S S __ _.Qg,-msL________ ____ ,_ LOCA T lOll OF PROP ERTY P 7_?_0.!:11:h_~p~inq_.-s:t:reE!:t:_________ Fractional Lot 8 and all Lot 9, Block 29, East Aspen Addi tio?a!_J~wn~it_E!...E1.sl Fractio~_aJ_:[,Q.Lli,_~locL~fL~_H~nd (Street & 'lumber of Subdivision I3lk, & Lot No,) Townsite of Aspen Building Permit Application and prints or any other pertinent dat,) must accompany this applicCltion, and vlill be irIilde part of CASE iW, THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION, DESGRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SPOWI~G JUSTIFICATIONS: See attached description ? Yes No x S I G ~_'v 1f;/v4~_~~JiE__ A-di?fffritO~- --------.--- - ---~---~ Will you be represented by counsel PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE FOR NOT GRANTING: REQUIRING THE BUILDING I~SPECTOR BOARD OF ADJUSHiENT AI:I) REf,SON , Application is made for a building permit to build a two-family dwelling in the C-l Zoning District. The C-l Zoning district requires that 25% of the lot area must be in opE,n space. Open space is defined as a portion of a building site, one side of which shall be open to the street unobstructed from ground level to the sky with the exception of permitted architectural projection above ground level and which space shall not be used for storage, swimming pools and other recreation areas, trash area, rear access area, parking or structures of any nature except fountains, pathways, fc'ncc's and landscaping, Open space further requires that th(~ space which is open to t1L' c;tn,,' bE' at lca,;t one-half of the dimension of that sjde of the buildin'J "it", ti1.'1t tht...~ upen space be at: Jeil:-;t_ ]0 fe'et d,,'('p ':llHl that the' Upc'l1 ;;f~,l~~l' ~)\' cunCillu lU::; an(1 not obr,trl1ct:c'd h'.i th bui Jdinq <li'!lllj"tcnLlIlC'(':-; (lI1d ':1111','!\d.1,!(' 'I'll(' 11C\'!h)~~('d pr:-()jC'ct \,'{'l1,11d h,.lv~' 1111.' C'll;l-illUi Ly of th,' ()lh'l1 ;;11,:,'( lJJ'l';\.~'l1 llY ...1n lH Lout widl' dl"ivl'\";llY It) d r,ll'kinq qaraqc illld IhlJ.t (,1 1-1L' l' . - S i 'll1('d (~)\f('I" . ~ , ,t ~ II " d \ I' it, ~ i:!) ;1,1'\ 1'1: [ii \ 1 '; In:: ll,'\ : L . , :, ~ ! ; II l P I, \ I l I I I ! ~ /'.:.; r; I , , ,...... '''"'' open space that is open to the street would only be 9 feet deep. Sec. 24-3,7(d) Open Space Requirement. r ClaytJ) H. Meyri 9 Chief uilding Inspecto , , I' ('. r''''- ........)>.'. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOWING JUSTIFICATIONS Applicant seeks a variance from the strict application of the Building Inspector's decision and determination of the open space requirements under Sec, 24-3-7 (d) (2) and (4) based upon applicant's preliminary plans that the 18 foot driveway portion crossing the open space area to the underground parking garage is unqualified as open space and, further, that it disqualifies the balance of the Spring Street open space to the north of driveway as being un- continuous. Justifications for the variance are: 1. Private driveways crossing open space areas are not directly or indirectly prohibited by the code - as are certain other uses and activities, which are specifically prohibited thereby. Therefore, the 18 foot private driveway portion should be counted; and it likewise follows that the rest of the open space to the north should count also. 2. Applicant has approximately 300 additional, un- counted square feet of open space along Spring Street to the south besides the existing building. This extra open space, while only 9 feet deep, ought to be counted as it will be fully landscaped with new trees, grass, shrubbery, etc. 3. Applicant's practical difficulty with the Building Inspector's determination of the open space requirement directly relates to its plan to construct underground parking, Access thereto is available only from Spring Street, which is where street front open space must be, Therefore, the strict enforcement of the Building Inspector's determination of the open Sp3CC requircnwnl will result in an unnecessary h:lrl1f::hip to .-:q1fl] il~~lnt and I1ldkc it il\lpo::--;siblc~ for it to provjdc~ Ull~l('r'in)lllH~ ;'dl"Lilhlf \\'I1.ich i~~ :1 !"dLul'C' 01 thl.~ r11'o.']I.-'cl: th~ll -","", ,...... ........ is beneficial to the public interest, Applicant further observes that its proposed residential building constitutes a less intensive use of the land than is otherwise permitted in the C-l zone. Therefore, applicant submits that a variance or modification of the Building Inspector's decision or inter- pretation of the open space requirements applying to this project will, in the face of these practical difficulties, avoid an unnecessary hardship for applicant and, in fact, better further the spirit of the zoning ordinance and benefit t,he public welfare by way of making it possible for applicant to construct the underground parking. -~)- , r" ""....- theodore I. mularz. AlA. architects 119 south spring street. aspen, colorado 81611 phone 303/92~j 3~j(:.>!:::> warren I. palmer, associate 7 July 1977 Mr. Charles Paterson, Chairman The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Case No. 77-18 Spring Street Associates 117 South Spring Street ,Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dea r Cha r I Ie: This letter Is In response to the Notice of Public Hearing for the variance requested for the above property which Is across the alley from our new build- Ing. Dr. and Mrs. Schiff and I have no objection to your granting the variance provided the following conditions are met: 1. A sidewalk should be built In conjunction with the new construction. The foot traffic In this area has Increased appreciably, creating a muddy mess I~ the summer after a rain and an equally messy situation In the winter with an unmaintalned path. 2. A landscape plan, with an assurance of proper maintenance, should be submitted and be a requirement of the project. 3. The existing office building on this site is set back from the alley approximately ten feet allowing parking for two cars maximum, If they are parked parallel to the building. Currently the building occupants are angle parking In this space, not only blocking the alley, but making access to our off-street parking area difficult. This Is a situation that should be cleared up since the addition of a two family dwelling can only serve to compound the problem. , ,..... ......,.... 7 July 1977 Mr. Charles Paterson, Chairman page 2 4. Space should be provided for the trash dumpster which Is presently kept at the street curb where a sidewalk should be. Currently the property Is poorly maintained, If at all, and Dr. and Mrs. Schiff and I would hate to see this compounded by additional density. If, however, the above conditions can be met, we would encourage your granting the variance, since It would help clean up the corner of Spring and I\:aln as well as the alley. Slncerel y, THE HOPKINS STREET VENTURE ~-m~ Theodore l. Mularz, AlA Manager TlM:as cc: Dr. and Mrs. Samuel B. Schiff Clayton H. Meyring, Chief Bldg. Inspector City of Aspen