Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19910808 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 8, 1991 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4:00 P.M. A G E N D A I. MINUTES June 6, 1991 II. CASE #91-4 JOHN F. SWEENEY �v RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 8, 1991 Chairman Remo Lavagnino called meeting to order at 4 : OOpm. Answering roll call were Rick Head, Ron Erickson, Charlie Paterson and Remo Lavagnino. MINUTES JUNE 6, 1991 There were not enough members present from the June 6, 1991 meeting to approve these minutes. CASE #91-4 JOHN F. SWEENEY Remo read into record request for variance. (Attached in Record) Affidavit of notice by mail was presented. The posting sign was also presented by the applicant. John Sweeney: Introduced wife Vivian, architect Rudy Metzer and Son Edward who lives in the second house which is a 400sgft house behind. It has been there as far back as anybody can remember. The main house is probably a hundred years old. It has been added onto a couple of times. Remo: To Bill Drueding--Is adding a roof--it is a flat roof, right? Drueding: Yes. This is an enlargement. Remo: Why? Drueding: It is up. It is going to be volume. Remo: Useable volume? Drueding: It doesn't matter. The code says to extend or enlarge. This is an extension. You can't do anything. You cannot enlarge one bit. Rick: They donated that cottage in the back as cottage infill. Drueding: There are 2 single family houses on this lot of 6, 000. Remo: And you need 9, OOOsgft. Drueding: So it is a non-conforming use. It is not the structure, it is the use. BAM. 8.8.91 Sweeney: Basically we bought our first house in Aspen in 1966 so we are Aspen residents. We have a house in Denver but very rarely visit there. I am retired and Vivian and I want to live here. So we are trying to fix the house up to at least make it useable. We started planning this in January. We have been before a lot of committees and we met a lot of the people in the Building Dept. We are not asking for an increase in the footprint of the house. We just want to bring it up to date. The old front of the house has--you can see by the picture--it has got an awful falling down look and we want to just bring it up to date. We want to take a wall out between the little front room and the room next to it and we would like to straighten out the front end. The reason for wanting to straighten out the front end is we have a terrible ice problem. When we say straighten it out what we are talking about is moving the--tilting the roof up 20 degree angle and attaching it. In the Spring of the year particularly when the water does start to melt on the sloping roof above these 2 little flat roofs the water runs onto the flat roof and freezes. And by the first of April we have got a blue ice that will be 2 and 1/2 feet thick. That ice then begins to try to migrate--there is a slight slope on the roof--maybe 2 or 3 degrees. And it will begin to migrate off of the front of the house till it gets about that far off--a foot or a foot and a half--and then it will suddenly break off. And there is hundreds of pounds of ice. If it would ever fall on somebody's head--luckily it hasn't so far but it is a grave danger. And that grave danger to us is what the hardship is. We have looked around at every house that we can find that might have had a flat roof once and found that they have all done just what we are talking about. They have all tilted their roof enough so that they have a little slope that they can--these heat tapes are pretty good if you have got a little slope. But the manufacturer of the heat tape tells you "Do not use on flat roofs" . And after rebuilding that heat tape tangle up there 3 different years and trying everything that we can do with heat tapes I am inclined to believe the manufacturer. They won't work on flat roofs. We won't get any more volume because that will be dead space up there. So Mr. Drueding thought the only way we could do this was to get you people to approve it. He then passed pictures of houses with this solution to the ice problem. 2 BAM. 8. 8.91 Rick: Is this house not historical with some kind of rating? Sweeney: It has some kind of a rating. yes. It is in the historical district. Rick: Wouldn't any kind of change need the HPC approval? Drueding: No. Leslie Lamont, Planning Dept: Something like this would probably be a minor change. Rick: This could be administratively handled? Leslie: Probably. If they wanted to push the front out and things like that, that would be before HPC review. HPC doesn't do interiors. Rick: And HPC does not need to be notified on this change? Leslie: Roxanne will look at this and she will decide whether to take it to HPC full meeting or just in-house. Remo: HPC has jurisdiction before it comes to Board of Adjustment. We are a quasi judicial board. Once we make a decision I don't think the HPC can rescind that decision because they don't like the slanted roof for instance. So either it goes before them first and they make recommendations to the Board or else they handle it themselves. Drueding: It was my understanding they didn't have any control over this. Rick: I want to hear in Mr. Sweeney's words what their practical difficulty or hardship is. Sweeney: The hardship to us is just that these old roofs are dangerous with the way the ice forms and moves out and drops on whoever could be standing out in front of the front door. To us it is a grave danger. Remo asked for public comments. - There were none and he -closed_ the _ public portion of the meeting. Remo asked for comments from the Planning Office. Drueding: We have no objection with this variance being granted. 3 BAM.8 .8 .91 MEMBER COMMENTS Rick: I am in favor of granting this variance with the hardship that has been presented. The safety factor being the hardship. Ron: I need to state for the record, I have managed their house in the past. They are not currently clients nor do I expect them to be in the future. I don't think I have a conflict of interest. I would be in favor of granting this variance on the basis that it is a minimal variance. They are not increasing any usage area and it is basically to eliminate a potential safety hazard. I am for it. Charlie: There is definite proof of hardship or practical difficulty in this case and I would be in favor of granting the variance. I know what ice can do in this town and so does everybody else on this Board. I feel this would be a very good improvement. Remo: I think the spirit of the ordinance for not expanding a non- conforming use is to really retire structures that were non- conforming. They don't want you to improve upon them which would allow you to keep the non-conformity. They want to retire them. I think this case is a little different since it is established. It is not going to be retired. It is going to be permanent. I doubt whether any of the structures will be torn down. I think that the next factor having accepted that is safety and the welfare of both the inhabitants of the house and also that it does conform with our guidelines of having practical difficulties. I don't see any--although the usage is expanded, you are not gaining anything square footage, you are not sneaking in any storage space. So I am definitely in favor of this variance. MOTION Ron: I move we grant this variance as requested on Case #91-4 . Charlie seconded the motion with all in favor. Ron made a motion to -adjourn meeting with all in favor. Jan , a M. Carne , ' City Deput. Clerk 4 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CASE #91-4 JOHN F. SWEENEY 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, Colorado, (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, 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 consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. Particulars of the hearing and requested variance are as follows: Date and Time of Meeting: Date: August 8, 1991 Time: 4 : 00 p.m. Owner for Variance: Appellant for Variance: Name: John F. Sweeney John F. Sweeney Address: 533 West Hallam Location or description of property: 533 West Hallam, Block 30, Lots A & B Variance Requested: Property is located in the R-6 zoning category. It contains two single family units on a less than 9,OOOsgft lot. This is a non-conforming use. Sec 5-201 (B) (3) Non- conforming use shall not be extended or enlarged. Sec. 9-102 (c) Aspen Land Use Regulations. Applicant appears to be asking for roof enlargements over the front porch and room. Will applicant be represented by counsel: Yes: No: X The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Jan Carney Deputy City Clerk