HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19870813 CITY OF ASPEN
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AUGUST 13 , 1987
4.00 P.N.
A G E N D A
I. ROLL CALL
II. MINUTES OF JULY 2, 1987
MINUTES OF JULY 16 , 1987
III. NEW BUSINESS
Case #87-10 / Toddy Wynne
IV. ADJOURNMENT
RECORD- OF-FROCREDINGS
BOARD--OF`-A�STMENTS AMST--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.
MINUTEM -OF-_JULY 2. -1987
Ron Erickson made a motion to approve the minutes of July 2 ,
1987 .
Charlie Paterson seconded the motion with all in favor.
M1!=ES--OF--JUL-Y if:- 3987
There was a question as to whether the applicant, Dale Potvin,
had said "zoning" in his presentation on page 2. I listened to
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-#87 1$--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 it. The City did not want to
allow this split.
Remo: This was a lot split?
1
Harry Mayer : No, it was a change of a lot.
Ron: Re-alignment of a lot line.
Rick : A lot line adjustment.
Harry : Lot line adjustment . 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 battle with Council I believe 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 distributed and would have
solved my problem here. I have come up with a few other
alternatives 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 12A 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
2
look at the property, there is a burm so that the stake east of
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 the other side. I have run
into so many problems with trees. To get a tree taken down in
this town, it is another meeting.
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 necessarily 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. I agree there is a lot--It is a huge lot the
rest of the way.
Josephine: Are the owners feeling they really need an attached
garage?
Harry : It is attached to the house but it does not enter the
house. They go outside a little bit under an overhang. There is
no direct access to the house from the garage.
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.
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. Sue the realtor for
misrepresentation, or the former owner.
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 2 feet. You wouldn't have the rear
yard setback. It would just be the front corner and it would
probably be about 1 foot.
4
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: I agree with Rick and feel that there are other altern-
atives 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.
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
5
plenty of land but the location of the garage anywhere else does
not make a lot of sense. This is the only place for this
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, yes.
Charlie made a motion to adjourn.
Rick seconded the motion with all in favor.
The time was 4: 50 pm.
Janice Carney, C ty Deput Clerk
6
0 - �
LU
Q m
i '�''�Ji"f�L�L�I:�C/L'C_.+� �"/�' `/ /KiW-G(/L/C../ .,�'L�7��✓!/iL��l/�!/�-"�1sY.L•"!,�` °k�'�'�c-'C�'.
ue-4:�
�, /-� �!�'L`EGG=T� �-•d�"�1�-Z�=y ��2�'�'� � .��-�=� �
r,�
7 �