HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.Lot C Block 91.004-73
"
APPEAL TO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT
CIIT OF ASPEN
fEI 12-73
ZJ88J' ****10.00
Feb. 6, 1973
Case No.
'7~ - L.j
Date
Copland Finholm Hagman
. Appellant Yaw Ltd, Architects-PlannersAddress Box 2736, Aspen, Co. 81611
Owner KNCB Moore
Address Box 690, Aspen, Colo. 81611
Location of Property Lot C, Block 91, Aspen Townsite
(Street & Number of Subdivision Block & Lot No.)
Building Permit application and, prints or any other pertinent data
must accompany this application, and will be made a part of
Case No. -]"'<,-4
The Board will return this application if it does not contain all the
facts in question.
Description of proposed exception showing justification:
See Attached Exhibit
~
Signed=---- ~
~J-
Provisions of the Zoning Ordinance requiring the Building Inspector
to forward this application to the Board of Adjustment and reason
for not granting permit. APPLICATION IS MADE FOR A BUILDING PERMIT
TO BUILD AN OFFICE BUILDING. IT IS PROPOSED TO PURCHASE THE REQUIRED OFF
STREET PARKING FROM THE CIIT OF ASPEN AS PERMITTED IN THE C-C DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING IS LOCATED IN THE C-l DISTRICT WHICH DOES
NOT PERMIT PURCHASING OFF-STREET~NG SPA~. Sec 24_9(f)pag.e 1516.
CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR _ ~ _~q
Status C TO H. J
Permit rejected date Decision ~ Date
Application filed
Date of Hearing
Mailed
Secretary
---
...,....,
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Case No. 73 - 4
BEFORE THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
TO ALL PROPERlY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR USE
VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW:
Pursuant to the Official Code of Aspen of June 25, 1962, as amend-
ed, a public hearing will be held in the Council Room, City Hall,
Aspen, Colorado, (or at SQch 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 Resolution, Title XI, 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 personrlly 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 con-
sideration 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:
March l, 1973
3:00 p.m., Council Chambers, City Hall
Name and Address of Applicant for Variance:
Name: Copland Finholm Hagman
Address: Box 2736, Aspen, Colo.
Location or description of property:
Location: Lot C, Block 9l, Aspen Townsite
Description:
Variance requested:
Application is made for a building permit to build an office building.
It is proposed to purchase the required off street parking from the City of
Aspen as permitted in the C-C District. The proposed office building
is located in the C-l District which does not permit purchasing off-street
IRmift~'Qih ll:ml<Vboriance: (Please cross out one) parking space.
~
Permanent
THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
BY
Chairman, By KLD
~ ~ ~~~
1i-f <+ <1 (gcr .
TO"",< t~C1-\ ~SOtJ
~. .~~w. .....T j
~ eorcr (?HA-'S~
~ ~~ ~~ q..~L
f.>qG {2-4~
I , .... .l' 1.- ..j/?'~ .:;. --~. '.~: ,(.' r .... '
'. ~Ir... _ _ . . _ J ........ ____._ _~ __
~ ~- - ~ -. ..." ~I:. .....-..-=.- ___;-,,"::.~~~,.....~~
/a !'~...'" )._~.~.~.: ,,-._ _.. _....-,;;,..':_..... ......,_.... _,
t ~
The matter here presented to the City of Aspen Board
of Adjustment is for consideration of an alternative to an
impractical application of the off-street parking provisions
of the Zoning Code provided for development of parcels of
property situate in the C-l Zoning District of the City of
Aspen (Section 24-9(f), Page 1512, et seq., of the Official
Code of the City of Aspen, 1971 Ed.).
In the case at hand, the property owner is K,N.C.B.
Moore, and the property is Lot C, in Block 91 of the City and
Townsite. At the present time, approximately the Southerly
One-Half of the subject property is occupied by an attractive
apartment structure of fairly recent vintage which has more
than sufficient landscaped open space to comply with the
provisions of the Zoning Code presently in effect, and Mr.
Moore intends to leave the said improvements in place. The
Northerly One-Half of the lots fronting on Durant Street
(across from Rubey Park) is presently occupied by an older
frame structure presently utilized for apartments. Mr. Moore
proposes to raze the older structure and erect in its place
a building with low traffic studio type offices to accommodate
artists, craftsmen and the like.
The difficulty in removing the existing structure for
renewal of the improvements is the requirement that parking
spaces of sufficient size (as determined by Section 24-9(f)
(Personal Service) of the Code, page 1514) be provided for the
proposed structure which to reiterate is to be situate on the
Northerly One-Half of one 30' x 100' city lot, i.e., on 1,500
square feet of land. The architects and planners for the
project feel strongly that while the imposition of the off-
street parking requirement is justified and can be accommodated
easily in a multi-lot development in the C-l Zoning District,
the application of the requirement to one-half of a single lot
presents an economically unsolvable engineering problem, which
even if partially solved would provide at best an inefficient
unworkable result failing to accommodate the requisite parking
and the best of planning and zoning practice.
After conferring with the Planning Department of the
City of Aspen, the property owner and architects and planners
submit that a viable alternative to a strict application of
the on site off-street parking requirement would be to permit
the utilization for the proposed renewal on this small parcel
of property of alternative leased parking as expressly permitted
and encouraged in the C-C Zoning District of the City of Aspen
by virtue of Section 24-9(f) of the Code, page 1516. Unfor-
tunately, however, that provision, on its face, is, as a matter
of right, applicable only in the C-C Zoning District. There-
fore, special consideration is needed for this proposal. The
Planning Department suggested the proposal for lease of
off-site parking be presented to the Planning and Zoning
Commission for its approval in concept. The same was so
presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission's regular
meeting held on February 6, 1973, and by unanimous vote, the
approval in concept was obtained. It is the owner's request
upon such approval in concept from the Planning and Zoning
Commission that a variance be granted by the Board of Adjust-
ment so that the owner may negotiate with the City Manager to
make provision of adequate off-site parking. The only prohibi-
tion contained in the Code is that off-street parking for any
C-l use shall in no case be located in an adjacent residential
district. This would seem to contemplate off-site parking
under an arrangement such as we are proposing, subject only
to the condition that it not be in an adjacent residential
district.
It should be pointed out with respect to the request
for consideration here made that besides the small size of the
lot, the property lies immediately adjacent to the boundary
of C-C Zoning District and abuts the direct route of the
pedestrian transit system which is proposed by the City Planner
- 2 -
II
to be routed along Durant Street; and, in addition, is adjacent
to Rubey Park, which available information indicates will
likely be fully committed to surface parking.
Finally, it is reminded that the request for a variance
herein made is not without precedent in that recent actions
of this body and the Planning and Zoning Commission have
indicated that proposed additions to the Hotel Jerome complex
(also in the C-l District, but on some 13 or 14 city lots) has
been permitted an alternate to a strict application of the
off-street parking requirements, While perhaps the action in
the Hotel Jerome matter may not be exactly compared to the case
at hand, it is propounded that flexible solutions tailored to
peculiar circumstances result in innovative high-quality
planning.
- 3 -
I
.
o Bldg. & Wiring
o Bicycle License
o Cigarette Tax
o Contractor License
o Court Fines
I
I
I
I
o Dog License
o Dog Impound Fee
o Employee Registration
--
- -
CITY C-".sPEN
oJ
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
~
.,
CASHIER'S RECEIPT
No.
o Mise. & Short Checks
o Sales Tax License
o Business License
o Spec. SI. Assess.
o Tow Ticket
o Traffic Ticket
o Mops. Codes & Zoning
o Zerox Copies
o Other
/
RECEIVED
OF:
-~--'-
I.
o
o
RECORD OF PHOCEEDlNCS
HID Ll'~"VE';
~~.., ~.f ~ .'.'._" \0_"
.-- --------
------
Regular Heeting
Aspen Planni~g & Zoning
Febru~ry 6. 1973
I
I
I
I
I
Meeting .,vas called to order by Acting Chairman James Adams at 5: 00 p .m.,.;ith
Bruce Gillis, Victor Gaodhard, Barbara Lewis and Anthos Jordan. Also presenc
City/County Planner Herb Bartel and .Building Inspector Clay tan Heyring. .
Gillis mov.:!d to. apprcve the minutes af January l6, 1973. Seconded by Cood-
hard. All in favar, mDtion carried.
I
Charles Collins arrived.
Dick Meel,er
I Stream Huq;i.n
h Reques t
Plat uar. reviewcd, Com::nission previously viewed the site.
One hundred year fload area was outlined on the plat by the
Corp of Engineers.
r
I'
I
.1
Ii.
Recommendations from the Pl~nning Office were submitted
stating the following: (l) Prior to. the issuance of a
buUding permit a limitation be placed on the land 'vitr-d.n
tbe 100 year flood area so no construction wauld take place
at a later date in this ;1rea. (2) Easements shawn an tbe
preliminary river ,;tudy be dedicated to the City as a con-
dition of the building permit; conditional easerr,enc between
buildings 1 and 2 to. connect to the alley be pravid2d by
the applicant; (3) f;'nall section of BLM land [eel the City
shauld be respansE<i.€ to get an easement OIl that la:10; (4)
canstruction not encroach into the easeoent ereas sa that
none af the vegetation ar bank of the river are disturbed.
\
Ii
.,
'\
,
1
i _
11-
n
I'
Applicant request pej:mission to remove the pUll'phouse TIml
existing on the property. Building Inspector and E::gim~er
report the City dces not have a use for this. There are no
objections by the applic &ont of the Planning Office re-
comoendations.
I
r,
"
~
Jardan moved to approve and reconunend to the Building I~-
sp.ector thut the following canditions be made a part of the
building permit: (1) No. further canstruction in the lOD
year flood plain area; (2) Trail easement along the river
be conveye<.l to the City conditional upan the City salution
on connectin8 the trail to the BLH land; (3) a";.mer cf the
property convey eaRements to. the City for t~ail syscen;
(4) recammend lanocHmer renove the pump house presently
existing on the property; (5) no motorized v02hicles be
allmved on the premises and (6) 1<0 encroachment into the
easement area during constructiOtl as th3t veget;l~ioll is
not di.s~l1rbed. Secol,ded by CU,lis. All in favar, rr;otion
ca::riecl,
I
I
I
I
I
I
Towne Place,
Parking
_'" ttor:1cy Leonard Oates r2p~:ef;ep"tJ"r:g K. N. C. B. Huon' r'~ques t
the Satr.e pl'ivilf'ge as allmoJcd in the C-C zone mId [-11.:'1:: is
to. lease parking off el..: si te. Hl'. Ontf'S a:c~;.!(!d '.:he pJ:operty
is sm<lll - one Int - 30 x 100. Underground p,~:.: Idr.;!, or 011
site parking an, not pro1cticnl. Requesting L1?lycov3l of
"~'"
......
"
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
,.-..,,,,, C-". ",E(~a B. B. 5 L. ~~.
Bd. of Adj., 3/l/73, continued.
Chairman Dukes closed the public hearing, Board recessed the
meeting. Meeting resumed.
Paterson moved to grant this variance to add a small addition,
not to exceed l40 square feet, since this does not adversely
affect the neighborhood or the comprehensive general plan.
Seconded by Colestock. Roll call vote - Paterson aye;
Lavagnino aye; Colestock aye; Smith aye; Dukes aye. Motion
carried.
CASE NO. 73-3 GORDON FORBES
Chairman Dukes opened the public hearing and read the particulars
of the case. Request to build a second story addition, non-
conforming front yard setback.
Correspondence from the following were read by the Board, all
objec1:ing to the granting of the variance: John B. Wogan, Jr.,
Patricia Singleton, Charles and Betty Nicola, Ann Garrity,
Maxwell Joyner, Geri Vagneur, Ted Ryan, John Sweeney, Amory
Bradford.
Ms. Ann Schwind was present and stated she was not in favor
of the granting of this variance. Ann Farrish stated she objected
to the granting of the variance, Heather Tharp stated she objected
on the grounds of density, the house already is a duplex.
Board reviewed the plans. Mr. Forbes was not present or rep-
resented. Board ascertained from the plans Mr. Forbes intends
to change the first story to a single unit and add a unit which
would be the second story.
Chairman Dukes closed the public hearing, Board recessed the
meeting. Meeting resumed.
Paterson moved to deny the granting of this variance because of
the over-whelming objections presented; granting of this variance
would adversely affect the comprehensive general plan of the
neighborhood and applicant did not show any hardship. Seconded'
by Smith. Roll call vote - Paterson aye; Lavagnino aye; Colestock
aye; Smith aye; Dukes aye. Motion carr'
CASE NO. 73-4 COPLAND, FINHOLM AND HAGMAN
Chairman Dukes opened the public hearing, and read the particulars
of the case. Attorney Leonard Oates representing Towne Place
stated the applicant, based on approval in concept from the
Planning and Zoning Commission (minutes 2/6/73) is requesting
the authority to negoiate with the City Manager to obtain leased
off site parking spaces. Will meet the required number of
spaces for the C-l zone. Hardship exists due to this being
a small lot, the location of this lot is on the transit system
as proposed in the transportation plan and lot is located
adjacent to the C-C zone which does allow for leasing of parking
spaces. Approximately six spaces would be required.
Chairman Dukes closed the public hearing, Board recessed the
meeting. Meeting resumed.
Lavagnino moved to grant this variance from the requirement of
off street parking based on the fOllowing points: (l) difficult-
ies are incurred by a small commercial lot making it impossible
to supply parking on the premises; (2) applicant negoiate with
- 2 -
"
,
,
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
:C_~C_:..;..;;......::.:.~"_~::~EI ~~------------~--_.-.-----
Bd. of Adj" 3/l/73, continued.
THE Clty Manager on parking with parking not being in an ad-
jacent residential zone; (3) its noted this variance is granted
noting the recommendation of the Planning and zoning commission
in their minutes of February 6, 1973. Seconded by Smith.
Roll call vote - Smith aye; Colestock aye; Lavagnino aye;
Paterson aye; Dukes aye. Motion carried.
a1rman - Dukes nominated C ar es Paterson, seconded by
Unanimous vote was cast.
Board agreed that when any member notes a violation, to submit
same to the Secretary who in turn will submit the violations
to the Building Inspector.
Colestock mentioned three items for the Buildig Inspector to
check into: Slope Building parking; Continental Inn pass
violations; structure on roof of the Hotel Jerome.
Paterson moved to adjourn at 5:20 p.m., seconded by Smith.
All in favor, meeting adjourned.
~'\ ,/ ,I I )
/ !/''7-~'-..{ l ;.-......... ~~l-t~t,.( ,~.{./
~~6rraine Graves, Secretary