HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.408 E Cooper Ave.008-76
.
"8 0 -7F.
261614# ****10.00
<
APPEAL TO BOAfm OF ZONING ADJUSTf'1ErH
CITY OF ASPEN
DATE __3/;;'Q b---- CASE NO. /)
APPELLANT --A~ PEA) 5P()RT;LJKADDRESS I/D? E: CfJO PEi~ ~/i?JI1?~
PHONE _7),5' -{; 3 '3/ _
()ALE 1). 5'PEJ.Jrl: ADDRESS 7{)() J::2A<:'TLECpFl'::'kl)~jJ~tv
T1LJ:l;lJ /lA. 04KE<; ... f7.tJ.5 1t1rUIFw DR IJ-SPeV
LOCATION OF PROPERTY l-!(Yff E CcOPC:/'<? ~T
J.-OT I-:,..J- M "Bt.Oc.I<::. ~1 A ~PL;"IJ
(Street & Number of SUbOlvision Blk. & Lot No.
O\~ N E R
Building Permit Application and prints or any other pertinent
data must accompany this application, and will be ~ade part of
CASE NO.
THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN
ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOHING JUSTIFICATIOnS:
We are planning to build a second story over part of our
building built in 1968 and are requesting the following
variance.
Exception to Opera House view-plane. because the addition
would not appear in the view-plane more than the existing
surrounding buildings.
Will you be, represented by counsel
? Y"~N' ~~ I~
SIGNED: ~~/;;., . ae...
. Appe lant .
PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR
TO FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON
FOR NOT GRANTING:
-- ---------~~Tat u s---~- .-.
-S'rgned
PERMIT REJECTED, DATE
DECISION
DATE
APPLICATION FlLFD__;2II_i-f2Je._____.DATE OF HEARING ("j3/U
t" r, I LED -.5/.:2':LfU SEe R L TAR Y ._____ ______
',,,/
~~.t:2~
m)<!/ / I ;;( t
a~JvI cPo. ~/I II
~ ? t H. 01 ;/(c;..b 11-
/31Ju s: q ~~I
fl~}J /~1~d3tur..dii:b ~-t:h 3'/# ot
p [; . &1-(' 1.3 / / /!~ Ac/.- b [/1-)
~~ (l~ :1314{~ PC; - CU/~J/VL-
oP~tvt?- K#I'4-(}o< ~ b 6 'J-~~ ot
P {j. &-p / ?/ c:J I? v-J;:- /8 12V../ 80 ().A1.-J:..u,-,
17-~L---1 ~. fj- /6 / j
IJd f1--r~~
()).$/vntv /a~ q aly?ULtL~~ rltd:a /1.;0) p
r;. o. ~ if 6 (; /.3irH:-A-. s<j
~I ~. (fIt/!
u) tHJ#/ 1-0 a-r-..l.c;. ;' tJ
;2:wJv~ fA) o1fvJ.fj
P.[;. ~. 8003
{!.-<2..j2-e-1V ( (!.~. J It / J
/Jc~~ BJ;()Acb
Po. ~ /c;f
~ / f1P--Lo.
JJ0pctl ) {)/)'l71'~ /-1 0/ Rtf-~
3; eX /.{). 0.30CG
p? t.e.J-fo; eMu. cY /6(/ -..3
~-SlLu' ~a.~
p,o. Jf:u~~02 ~y
c~'-(~. 8/6,//
7/JtUUj ~-c-c-6j # v ~{;:;;tt; ,
~O'3o b 'if;. 3y-3 -~
/fIN) L-u, )~L/)
~ W~~/6;;t:; cy'
rI~ C- nv 6&~ &' q ;;L/
v:k tkv ~ a. ~A~
ct ~~ UJ~uy
~ ~~~.I-V
J/ p.::b It; mnL SC; V7/bL- ~~.
X {i:t/ r/ &-oL 8 'J, f!-c:t:z;; cI-
oj~
g. / ~ '-ft': ~ Xa-t- (!/
~r7
a.fJ of Ktrb ~~
HI ~ c~/ ct D hu
!3&;-tVj 0 ~~ ~
r!v&v .
...,V ~
JV~~~ - .
j 1i13~ rvv&49()
/ t )
APPEAL TO BUf1l<D OF ZON ING AD.JUSTrlENT
CITY OF P,SPEN
DA TE jl1tr'i If I {q 7{p
CASE NO.
74,-8
APPELLANT ASP@l. SPORTS-,-JNC'-__u_ADDRESS408 E. Cooper St., Aspen,.-CQ..lo.
PHONE 925-6331
OWNER
ASPEN SPORTS, INC.
ADDRESS408 E. Cooper St., Aspen, CoJo.
LOCATION OF PROPERTY
408 E. Cooper Stt., Aspen, Colorado
(Street & Number of Subdivision Blk'- & Lot No.)
Building Permit Application and prints or any other pertinent
data must accompany this application, and will be made part of
CASE NO.
'7f.,~
THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN
ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOWING JUSTIFICATIOnS:
SEE SECOND PAGE
Will you be represented by counsel
&-
PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR
TO FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON
FOR NOT GRANTING:
APPLICATION IS MADE FOR A BUILDING PERMIT TO BUILD
A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUSINESS BUILDING. The
proposed addition will add 3,466 square feet of floor area to the
existing building which has a floor area of 10,668 square .feet or
a total floor area of 14,134 square feet. The Floor Area Ratio
would be 2.35:1 whereas the maximum permitted Floor Area Ratio is
1.5:1 as recommended by the Planning and zoning Commission.
Recommendation of Area & Bulk Chart of Sec.24-3.4 CC Zoning District.
The proposed addition will encroach into the
Wheeler Opera House View Plane. No land shall be used and no building
shall be. erected, constructed, altered or changed so as to invade
any area designated as an area necessary for the preservation of
any mountain view. Sec. 24-6.4 (B)
._...chieL.BJ.l,ilCJi n'J' In"rectnr___
~tatlls
,
. M--
Siqned
Clay to H. Meyring
PERMIT REJECTED, D:HE______DECISION DATE
APPLICATION Fll.ED__:2.Jlihr" __DATE OF HEARING_(, /3 J~..(",
/ I --=--r-f-.L
. MA I LED ...di-/2.Lff:Zt.... S E C R F 1 A R Y _~____
~
".----.L_____.____
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOWING JUSTIFICATIONS
Appellant is requesting approval of second story addition
to its sports store (Aspen Sports) for additional retail and
office space for the store. The proposed addition will
consist of 3,466 square feet, including 549 feet storage space.
Efforts to obtain approval have been continuing since March, 1975.
Recently, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended
addition of 2:1 exterior floor area ratio and 1.5:1 interior
floor area ratio. The proposed addition meets the require-
ments of the 2:1 F.A.R., excluding storage, but not the 1.5:1
interior F.A.R. recommended by the P and Z. The proposed
addition is necessary to retain a centralized location and
provide sufficient service area for our customers. It should
be pointed out that the other buildings in the block are two
stories and that this expansion is not for the purpose of
creating additional density. The proposed addition will in-
croach into the imaginary view plane, but in fact there are
buildings which intervene between the Wheeler Opera House and
the Aspen Sports store, and the proposed addition will not
interfere with the present view.
Further, the present building was originally constructed,
at additional expense, to allow for this proposed second story
addition, which is necessary at this time.
Page 2
,
r'~...
street
81611
.
..C.."
CITY
130 so
aspen,
~lay 26, 1976
Dear Adjacent Property Owner,
You received in the mail a form stating that Aspen
Sports has applied for a variance from the Board of
Adjustment for approval of a second story addition
to its sports store for additional retail and office
space. The meeting which was scheduled for June 3,
1976 at 4:00 P.M. has been cancelled due to a lack
of a quorum. The Board will meet again on June 17,
1976, at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers to
discuss this variance request.
If you have any further questions regarding this
matter, please let me know.
Sincerely,
j;J.ey fY) if- ~ .
Libby W. Klym7j'- ~
Deputy City Clerk
L
"
.
Ify)
~ \-J_V\ \ 1(P
NOTICE OF PUBLIC .HEARING
Case No. 76-8
BEFORE THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMEtrr
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 v~riance
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.
yorrviews 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 Meetin&:
Date:
Time:
June 3, 1976
4:00 P.M.
Name and address of Applicant for Variance:
Name:
Address:
Aspen Sports, Inc.
408 East Cooper Street, Aspen, CO 81611
.
Location or ~escr~ption of property:
Location: 408 East Cooper Street
Description:
Variance Regues ted: Appellant is requesting approval of second story addition to its
sports store "[Aspen Sports) for additional retail and office space for the store. The proposed
addition will consist of 3,466 square feet, including 549 feet storage space. Efforts to
obtain approval have been continuing since March, 1975. Recently, Aspen Planning and .Zoning
Commission has recommended addition of 2:1 exterior floor area ratio and 1.5:1 interior
floor area ratio. The proposed addition meets the re~uirements of the 2:1 FAR, excluding
Duration of Variance: (Please cross out one) (cont'd on back)
1'€lHfl8iitlii;'
}'ermanent
THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTHENT
BY C~ fJ.+t./y~"Y\
Chairman
~~~
.0
~
VARIANCE REQUESTED (CONT'D)
storage, but not the 1.5:1 interior F.A.R. recommended by P&Z. The proposed addition is
necessary to retain a centralized location and provide sufficient service area for our
customers. It should be pointed out that the other buildings in the block are two stories
and that this expansion is not for tae purpose of creating additional density. The proposed
addition will incroach into the imaginary view plane, but in fact there are buildings which
intervene between the Wheeler Opear House and the Aspen Sports store, and the proposed
addition will not interfere with the present view.
Further, the present building was originally constructed, at additional expense, to allow
for this proposed second story addition, which is necessary at this time.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Case No. 76-8
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
2lf, Official Code of Aspen. All persons affected by the proposed v~riance
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.
you: 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:
June 3, 1976
4:00 P.l'!.
~ and address of Applicant for Variance:
Name:
Address:
Aspen Sports, Inc.
408 East Cooper Street, Aspen, CO 81611
ko~~t:.L~!_~.~~i12.!:_~an of pro:2crty:
Location: 408 East Cooper Street
Description:
V nricHlce Regues ted: Appellant is requesting approval of second story addition to its
sports store <[Aspen-s;ports) for additional retail and office space for the store. The proposed
addition will consist of 3,466 square feet, including 549 feet storage space. Efforts to
obtain approval have been continuing since March, 1975. Recently, Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission has recommended addition of 2:1 exterior floor area ratio and 1.5:1 interior
floor ~rea ratio. Jhe proposed addition meets the re~uirements of the 2:1 FAR, excluding
Duratl.on of Varl.ance: (Please cross out one) (cont'd on back)
re}\!l"e~'-a'l;"
permcment
TilE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUS'nmtiT
BY r~ 11,;~/~'Y\
Chairman
~(J f~~1 Mr,--
o
~
I
VARIANCE REQUESTED (CONT'D)
storage, but not the 1.5:1 interior F.A.R. recommended by P&Z. The proposed addition is
necessary to retain a centralized location and provide sufficient service area for our
customers. It should be pointed out that the other buildings in the block are two stories
and that this expansion is not for the purpose of creating additional density. The proposed
addition will incroach into the imaginary view plane, but in fact there are buildings which
intervene between the Wheeler Opear House and the Aspen Sports store, and the proposed
addition will not interfere with the present view.
Further, the present building was originally constructed, at additional expense, to allow
for this proposed second story addition, which is necessary at this time.
-..,
"'.. ./
RESOLu'rION OF TIlE ASPEN PLANNING AND
ZONING COl-UnSSION RECOMMENDING VAHIOUS
CHANGES TO THE i'I.SPEN ZONING CODE
AND DISTRICT MAP
WHElillAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has been
presented with recommended changes to the Aspen Zoning Code and Zone
District Map, constituting Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
and a public hearing on such changes has been properly noticed and
conducted on February 17, ::'976, and
WHEREAS, the Commission is required by virtue of Section
24-11.3(d) of the Aspen Municipal Code, subsequent to such public
hearing, to report and recommend to the City Council on the proposed
changes, and
WHEREAS, :':,ection 24-:'.1. 7 provides that if the Commission
shall affirmatively recommend changes to the map or code, and do so
by resolution, such recommendations shall have an interim effect, all
as further described in said section, and
\7lIEREAS, the Commission wishes to make known its recommenda-
tions with respect to every change proposed, and formalize its report
in resolution form such as to enjoy the effects of Section 24-11.7,
:lmv, 'l'HEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
CO~lilISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1. Recommendations with respect to the Area and Bulk Require-
ments Chart of Section 24-3.4.
Fl. Cormnercial Core (CC). The Commission recommends that
within this district the present externalFloor Area Ratio of 2:1 be
maintained but that there be established a new internal FAR as follows:
:Jet Commercial FAR by Right
1. 5: 1
Bonus FAR by Special Review
Residential
0.3:1
Additional Commercial
0.2:1
Gross Maximum FAR
2.0:1
because (i) this change will generate a desirable mix of uses in the
'-"
Co,
.
-:!-
commercial core, (ii) commercial uses will be available to subsidize
residential uses within the same structure, and (iii) for most areas
within the commercial core, con@ercial uses beyond the second floor
are not practical and the third and fourth floors are more amenable
to residential uses.
b. Commercial One (C-l). ~he Commission recommends that
within this district the external FAR should be reduced from 1.5:1 to
1:1, inasmuch as this will reduce building massing within the C-l dis-
trict. IIowever, the Commission further recommends that there be given
a density bonus of .5 for residential uses, the Commission being of
the opinion that the mix of commercial and residential uses is as
appropriate in the C-l as the CC district.
c. Commercial Lodge (CL). The Commission recomnends a
reduction of the external FAR in t~szone from 2:1 to 1.5:1, inasmuch
as the existing FAR would permit a building bulk and mass that could
constitute an unacceptable barrier between the City and its mountain
surroundings.
d. Neighborhood Commercial PUD (NC-PUD). The Commission
recommends the reduction of the existing external FAR from 1:1 to
0.5:1 to insure that the Neighborhood Commercial developments are of a
scale that is compatible with the residential areas they are designed
to service.
e. Service/Con~ercial/Industrial (S/C/I). The Commission
recommends the reduction of the existing external FAR in the S/C/I
districts from 2:1 to 1:1 because the existing FAR would permit
buildings of a size and mass incompatible with the areas in which
the S/C/I zone has been designated (the periphery of the City as
opposed to the commercial core).
f. Office (0). The Commission recommends the proposed
amendment to the external FAR in the 0 district from 1:1 to 0.75,
by right, with an additional .25 allowed for residential uses, by
Special Review. However, the Commission further recommends (i)
that the requirement that residential bonus be permitted only when
,""_e,,,
-'<..-,/
coordinated with the Dousing nuthority be dropped and such require-
ments be again considered only when the Authority has presented and
there has been adopted a housing plan for the community, and (ii)
that it be made clear that the residential density bonus does not
preclude use of 0 district lands entirely (or at a ratio greater
than .25) for residential uses which are specifically permitted.
g. Commercial One (Cl).. The Commission recommends that the
height limitation in this district be reduced from 40 feet to 32
feet, with a right to construct to the full 40 feet being given only
on Special Review. 'l'he recommendation is made because the desired
density reduction in this district can be achieved by the change in
FAR recommended above and in some instances 40 foot buildings may be
desirable to encourage variations in building heights within this
district both to eliminate the now monotonous skyline and provide
view planes around structures.
h. Commercial Lodge (CL). The Commission recommends that
the height limitation in this district be reduced from 40 feet to
28 feet, with a right to construct to the full 40 feet being given
only on Special Review. The reasons and rational for this recommenda-
tion are the same as those given in Paragraph g.
Section 2.
qecommended Change to the Permitted Conditional Uses
Chart of Section 24-3.2.
The Commission recommends the proposed amendment to the
Office One (01) and Office Two (02) zone categories to create one
office district (0) with the following elements:
INTENT - To provide for the establishment of offices and
associated con@ercial uses in such a way as to
preserve the visual scale and character of formerly
residential areas that now are adjacent to commer-
cial and business areas and along Main Street and
other high volume thoroughfares.
PERMITTED USES - Single family, duplex and multi-family
residences; professional and business offices.
CONDITIONAL USES - Art, dance or music studios; museums
mortuaries; library; day care centers; fraternal
lodges and social clubs; restaurants and/or
-)-
"
in th,' CC and C1 ,'l...,;tric1"c; bCCilUS(' t.his clu,v""-,,,shou]cl have th('
-~..
:cecommends the ch;:mge to include sub-)'ilsement and accessory storage
For purposes of calculating external floor area ratio,
there shall be included basement and subsurface commer-
cial storage areas but excluded subbasements and storage
areas which arc accessory to the principle use. Provided,
however, the sub-basclJl1ent and accessory stora'le areas
shall always be included in the CC and Cl district. Any
basement or subsurface area devoted to off-street parking
shall be excluded in calculating external floor area ratio,
nxcept in CC and CI districts, where it shall bo included,
24-3.7(3) (2) to read:
~he Commission, on review of the recommended change of Section
Section 4. 'i'he Amendment of Section 24-3.7(3) (2).
stores at a scale compatible with the Aspen Area.
feet is adequate for this use and will insure construction of such
square footage limitation for major appliance stores, as 9,000 square
the reduction from 12,000 square feet to 9,000 square feet as the
b. Section 24-3.6. Major ApRliance. The Commission recommends
will generate less cross-town traffic.
(i) are both more compatible with the scale of the Aspen area, and (ii)
force the development of smaller localized food service areas which
because it will preclude the construction of massive groceries, and
grocery accessory products and storage (gross total 15,000 square feet)
food products only, and an additional 3,000 square feet for additional
the reduction from 20,000 square feet to 12,000 square feet net for
a. Section 24-3.G. Food Store. The Commission recommends
Section 3. Chang",.,"-_ to the SCjuar.E".!,ootage Limitations of Section 24 -3.6.
residential structures.
provide a better integration of the new office with the existing
adoption of R-6 area and bulk requirements for offices uses will
districts are in areas predominantly residentially developed and the
The recommendation is premised on the fact that all existent office
AREA AND BULK
REQUIREMENTS - Same as R-6 District.
from an alley.
adequate parking is provided on site with access
has received an H, Historic Designation and
boarding houses if located in a structure which
.
'..,...~
effect of reducing the tendency of landowners to construct areas
which are ostensibly basements and later convert them to commercial
uses, but recommends against the inclusion of basement or subsurface
areas (in calculating external FAR) devoted to off-street parking in
the CC and Cl districts inasmuch as (i) in these commercial districts
underground parking areas will accommodate employer/employee parking
needs to reduce the use of public rights-of-'.7aY for this purpose, and
(ii) if the City wishes to encourage residential uses in these dis-
tricts, some parking must be available for residents of these areas.
Section 5. Rezoning of Lots 0, E, F, G, H and I of Block 78 from
Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to the Office (0) District.
The Commission recommends against the rezoning of Lots 0,
E, F, G, H and I of Block,78 from Neighborhood Commercial/Specially
Planned Area (NC/SPA) to the new Office to) district inasmuch as
there has been no demonstration that the present zoning is inappropriate
and the office designation has received no support at all.
Section 6. Various Other Changes to the Zoning District Map.
The Commission recommends and rejects various recommended
zone district changes, the areas of which are more particularly
defined on the map attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.
a. Nixed Residential (West). The Commission recommends the
change of the zoning of this area from R-6 to R-15 inasmuch as the
area (i) provides a transition area with adjacent county zone dis-
tricts, (ii) is limited in its development by the potential acquisition
and utilization (for public transit) of the Midland Right-of-;-Tay, and
(iii) will provide a gracious residential neighborhood for the
community.
b. Mixed Residential (East). The Commission recommends
against the rezoning of this area from R/MF to R-6 inasmuch as
development of the area to date is predominantly multi-family and re-
zoning would effect a limited number of landowners in an unfair manner.
c. Oklahoma Flats. The Commission recommends the rezoning
of this area from R-15 PUD to R-30 PUD because the area has limited
access and other development constraints that preclude intelligent
development at R-l5 densities.
-5-
d. Holy Cross ProE<:.rt.y. Tho Commission rccommends the
rezoning of this tract from R-15 PUD to R-30 PUD as such zone (1)
will be compatible with adjacent zone districts, and (ii) recognizes
the reduced development of the area anticipated in the Aspen Area
Greenway Plan.
e. Aspen One. The Commission recommends the rezoning of this
property from R-6 PUD to R-15 PUD for the same reasons described in
this section, paragraph d.
f. Riverside Property. 7he Commission recommends the rezoning
of this area from R-6 PUD to R-15 PUD because (i) it is shaded by
high bluffs resulting in a sunless area, not suitable for intense
residential development, and (ii) the area has very steep terrain.
g. Spring and Main (NE Block). The Commission recommends
against the rezoning of this area from R/MF to R-6 PUD inasmuch as
it is the opinion of the Commission that the present zoning is
correct as the area offers an appropriate site for multi-family
development.
h. Lakeview Subdivision. The Commission is satisfied that,
0ecause of limited access, the area is comparable to Oklahoma Flats
in its development potential, and that, consequently, reduction in
allowable density is appropriate. The Commission would recommend, how-
ever, that the area be rezoned from R-6 to R-30 PUD but realize that,
because this change was not advertised, the Commission is (at this time)
limited to a recannended change to R-15 PUD
i. ~-15 Lodge (PUD). The Commission recommends against the
rezoning of R-15L PUD districts to R-30L PUD inasmuch as retention
of the R-15L PUD should encourage the construction of additional
lodging units at the base of the mountain.
Dated:
Apri 1 ?
1 q7(;
I,
Elizabeth Klvr.l
, Secretary to the Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission, do certify that the foregoing Resolution was
adopted by the Commission at its special meeting held March 23, 1976.
___~: tL4/:..cJ) K~~uv-
ELI L:l\BE'j-'JI KLYM, o'ecr,g'tary
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
,-- ...,'"'
, ,.~
ALBERT KERN
ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW
P. O. BOX 388
.30 E. HYMAN STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81 81 I
TELEPHONE 13031 925-741 T
May 13, 1976
HAND DELIVERED
Mr. Clayton Meyring
Building Inspector
City of Aspen
Dear Calyton:
As you requested, the square footage given to me by
Gale Spence of Aspen Sports, Inc. are as follows:
Basement - 5,334 square feet (which includes
2,870 square feet of storage space)
First Floor - 5,334 square feet (which includes
601 square feet of storage space)
As shown in the Application for Variance, the proposed
second floor would consist of 3,466 square feet, of which
549 square feet would be for storage.
Please contact me if you require any further information.
Yours very truly,
UG
ALBERT KERN
AK/pa
cc. Gale Spence
....,., ''',-.~
SPORTHAUS LINDNER
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Box 1126
925.7849
25 May, 1976
City of Aspen
Council Room,
Aspen, Colo.
Board of Adjustment
City Hall
81611
ReI Case #76-8
Dear Sirsl
Sporthaus Lindner will be unable to attend the hearing in
regards to Aspen Sports, June 3, 1976, however we would like it
to be known that we have no objections in regards to the afore-
mentioned variance. Their proposed expansion meets with our
approval.
Sincerely,
. -. ,..;'Q, ~ '-"- ~~
Fr itz Lindner
Sporthaus Lindner
FL/mh
cc. Aspen Sports
14l!ly 3, 1976
Aspen Sports
P. o. Box 0
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re I Effect of Proposed zoning Code Chang-es
Gent1_onl
I have been given your letter to Staoy dated
April 21st in whioh you requested information on the effect
of the recently recOllUllended chang-es to the :roninq code and
district map. First, let me note that the next scheduled dis-
GUII.ion on the chAnges is Tueeday, M.y 4th, tit 5 P.M., :;t joint
p & Z and Council meeting on the recommendations.
With respect to the balance of your inquiries I must
conclude that you are not, ot this time, .legible for a permit on
the proposed oonstruction. Section 24-11.7 provides that once
the P & 3 has affirmatively rec01I1Illended a code change (by resolution)
no building- permits may be issued which would be prohibited by the
proposed amendment for a period of one year from the date of the
resolution. This period may be short.ened, however, in the event
the ",;oWlcil should, ;;y resolution, refuse t:o further consider such
amendment." As of yet, COWlcil has taken no such action.
Acoor4inqtoSection 24-13.3 of t.he code no land owner
enjoys immunity from a code chan9'eby'~orL~~th. fil1nq of a
building permit application. only after issuanoe-C)! sUC!h--aperm!t,
Hnd substantial reliance on its issuance, ean there be any defense
to the application of a code change on a pending developlllent. This
ordinance sect.ion incorporates t.he common law on the subject.
,o~ the above satisfies your inquiries, :1. am,
'lery truly yours,
/7
?~;?-Z/
Sandra M. Stuller
City At.t.orney
SS/pk
co: rtacy Standley .
6? c-<Pa";;1'P---n.- L~/
.---
~,
l.
'.~ . .' v'
./ uJ"f'-' ._" .~ '... \'\ ( ~.\i 1~'Y .
~y .y"', U' ~ fit-. ~"
\Y (\ \ V ,,---y"IA -
.~~. . ""If l~) \ 1 G
C\ pJ,t- \J(.,
G' 1"'. ,c)L (
~y~ . ~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
,-
""
Case No, 76-8
BEFORE THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTME~~
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 v4riance
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 -
yorrviews 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 reques ted variance are as fO.llo\-1s:
Date and Time of Meetin~:
Date:
Time:
June 3, 1976
4:00 P.M.
Name and address of Applicant for Variance:
Name:
Address:
Aspen Sports, Inc.
408 East Cooper Street, Aspen, CO 81611
.
Location or descr~ption of property:
Location: 408 East Cooper Street
Description:
Variance Reguested: Appellant is requesting approval of second story addition to its
sports store (Aspen Sports) for additional retail and office space for the store. The proposed
addition will consist of 3,466 square feet, including 549 feet storage space. Efforts to
obtain approval have been continuing since ~illrch, 1975. Recently, Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission has recommended addition of 2:1 exterior floor area ratio and 1.5:1 interior
floor area ratio. The proposed addition meets the re~uirements of the 2:1 FAR, excluding
Duration of Variance: (Please cross out one) (cont'd on back)
~el\ll"e*"-B*"Y
permanent
THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTHENT
BY C ~ 13 /~/).o9-Y\
Chairmnn
~ ~ IXr-
. c~
\\ )'! 0"
r . ~ ~J' C-,'
~~Ni ~ cv'~ CITY OF ASPEN
'(V 0ll, \ I :~ () sou t h g a I e n a
~ at'" asp e n ~ co lor ado
\)'
~
''''
...., ...~'
street
81611
Hay 26, 1976
Dear Adjacent Property Owner,
You received in the mail a form stating that Aspen
Sports has applied for a variance from the Board of
Adjustment for approval of a second story addition
to its sports store for additional retail and office
space. The meeting which was scheduled for June 3,
1976 at 4:00 P.M. has been cancelled due to a lack
of a quorum. The Board will meet again on June 17,
1976, at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers to
discuss this variance request.
If you have any further questions regarding this
matter, please let me know.
Sincerely,
j;J,}~, jY) -I~L1~
Libby ~J. Klym II
Deputy City Clerk
o
~
'.
VARIANCE REQUESTED (CONT'D)
storage, but not the 1.5:1 interior F.A.R. recommended by P&Z. The proposed addition is
necessary to retain a centralized location and provide sufficient service area for our
customers. It should be pointed out that the other buildings in the block are two stories
and that this expansion is not for the purpose of creating additional density. The proposed
addition will incroach into the imaginary view plane, but in fact there are buildings which
intervene between the Wheeler Opear House and the Aspen Sports store, and the proposed
addition will not interfere with the present view.
Further, the present building was originally constructed, at additional expense, to allow
for this proposed second story addition, which is necessary at this time. .