Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19921030 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 29, 1992 4 .00 P.M. SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM A G E N D A I. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL II. CASE #92-14 LESLIE J. RUDD III. MINUTES OCTOBER 8, 1992 IV. ADJOURN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CASE #92-14 LESLIE J. RUDD 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: OCTOBER 29, 1992 Time: 4 : 00 p.m. Owner for Variance: Appellant for Variance: Name: LESLIE J. RUDD TED GARDENSWARTZ Address: 300 WEST HALLAM Location or description of property: 300 WEST HALLAM Variance Requested: PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE R-6 ZONING CATEGORY. CHAPTER 24 SEC 3-101(A) (5) ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE: SLABS, PATIOS WHICH DO NOT EXCEED 30 INCHES ABOVE OR BELOW GRADE ARE PERMITTED INTO REQUIRED SETBACKS. APPLICANT APPEARS TO BE REQUESTING TO PLACE A THERAPEUTIC POOL IN THE SETBACK EXCEEDING THE 30 INCH BELOW GRADE MAXIMUM; ONE OF 6 FEET DEEP BELOW GRADE. Will applicant be represented by counsel: Yes: X No: The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Remo LaVagnino, Chairman Jan Carney Deputy City Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 29 1992 Present at this meeting were Rick Head, Ron Erickson and Remo Lavagnino. There being no quorum-- CASE #92-14 LESLIE J. RUDD Remo: I call this meeting to order for the purpose of tabling this hearing to date certain of Friday October 30, 1992 at 12 : 00 noon. Ron seconded the motion with all in favor. There was no one present from the public to make comments regarding this variance request. Rick made a motion to adjourn Ron seconded the motion with all in favor. Time was 4 : 40pm. Janice M Carney, City I eputy Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 30, 1992 Chairman Remo Lavagnino called meeting to order at 12 : 00 noon. Answering roll call were Ron Erickson, Anne Austin, Rick Head and Remo Lavagnino. CASE #92-14 LESLIE J. RUDD Remo read into record request for variance. (attached in record) Ted Gardenswartz, Representative for applicant: Presented affidavit of posting and of mailing. (attached in record) Anne: What size lot do we have here? Remo: Is that considered a duplex lot? Gardenswartz: It is. Remo: Is it a duplex lot? Gardenswartz: Yes. Anne: These are 2 living units here? Gardenswartz: Yes. I am Ted Gardenswartz representing the applicant, Mr. Leslie Rudd. This is Bill Campbell who is the architect on the project for Mr. Rudd. I think it is important to put this into perspective. This is a therapy pool for Mr. Rudd. And I read the Land Use Code and as somebody characterized earlier generally projections which do not exceed 30 inches below grade can't go in the setback. What this application is all about is putting this therapy pool into the setback. As you can see from the drawing the therapy pool has to be deeper than 30 inches in order for it to have any impact and any use for Mr. Rudd. As an initial matter, Mr. Rudd is planning to move here with his family. He is about 6 foot 2 and weights over 365 pounds. He is 52 years old. He has been diagnosed by doctors at Duke University as having serious heart and blood pressure problems that are related to his obesity. The reason we are here is he wants to build this therapy pool and the pool needs to be 6 feet deep. The idea of the pool is that he can do water aerobic activity in the pool that he cannot do according to his doctors on the ground because of his weight which causes significant problems to his joints, to his ligaments, etc. So it is not as though he can go jogging around. BAM10. 30.92 In a nutshell what we are seeking to do is just go 3 and 1/2 feet deeper than the 2 and 1/2 feet we could go in building this pool. And I would say I guess as an initial matter it seems to me that the visual impact of going an extra 3 and 1/2 feet is non-existent because the pool is there and it is 2 feet deeper or 10 feet deep I don't think it has any different visual impact from the street or from the neighbors perspective or anyone else. So I don't think that that should be an issue. The real issue is the need for the therapy. As you can see from the map there really is nowhere else on the lot for the therapy pool. It can't really go any closer to the house. As I understand it that is pretty much a bedroom there or a bathroom there and for safety reasons and other reasons they don't want to have it any closer to the house. All of you have seen Dr. Cobb's follow-up letter. (attached in record) and I guess what I should probably do is sort of go through this using your criteria as to what you consider. Obviously granting a variance should be consistent with the goals and objectives of the code. The purpose here is to enhance and foster the public health of Mr. Rudd and I don't know how to say this without sounding corny. But it seems to me that given his obesity, given the efforts that he has tried for years to deal with this and given the fact that it now is at a point where his blood pressure or his heart is such that it is getting more and more critical for him that to some extent I guess I would analogize this to some sort of a prescription on a healing art sort of level. And I don't want to be cynical about that because I think that in real life that is where he is. And I think that is what his doctors are saying and I guess it is difficult to imagine getting to that point maybe for US. But Mr. Rudd is there and he needs this and this is really his--getting to his last efforts to try to deal with his problem. Your code also talks about variances that will make a reasonable use of the parcel or structure. I think it is important to bear in mind we are only looking to go 3 and 1/2 feet deeper than we are allowed. The pool needs to be 6 feet. He is going to do his water aerobics with harnesses and he has got to be standing apparently at least shoulder depth. I have an article that the doctor faxed me. It talks about how when one is submerged up to one' s shoulders in the water, 90% of the weight is removed. So he needs to have the pool to be at least that deep to have the effect that is intended to have. He also needs it to be of a size in order for him to motor around in the pool so that he can get the intended aerobic benefits of this. 2 BAM10. 30.92 I think a literal interpretation of your code deprives Mr. Rudd of rights commonly enjoyed by others and certainly would work a practical difficulty. It seems to me if I were reading the code that if Mr. Rudd were so inclined, he could build a pool that would be 5 feet deep by essence of going 30 inches above grade and 30 inches below grade. So the practical difficulty--he could have a 5 foot deep pool if he wanted to. If he had a 5 foot deep pool he could fill it up to 4 feet 6 or 7 inches of water. I don't know how much would be displaced but I think what we are really talking about is one foot. And I think that is the practical difficulty here. And I would submit that these visual impacts of having a pool totally below grade rather than having the 30 inches above and 30 inches below would be much less of a visual impact for all the neighbors. Remo: You are putting a wall in, right? Gardenswartz: Yes. And I understand the argument well that this is a new structure. And I understand the position that he should have thought about this earlier. He should have designed this pool to fit in there earlier. He didn't. The pool was not planned ahead of time. He was at the Duke University this summer. I don't think he should be punished for that. I think that he is not trying to end-run anything. He is not trying to get some sort of a benefit. He is just trying to get this pool to help him. And it is not, I don't think, a special privilege. I think he could build a smaller pool if that would work for him and his doctor said it wouldn't. He could build a pool a foot shallower. And I don't think that would work either. And I think on a human level what he is asking for is not that much. And he is asking for your help so that he can do what his doctors want him to do. Remo: What intent of putting it--what is the 30 inch below grade. How does the City arrive at that figure. Drueding, Zoning Dept: That has been part of the code since I have been here. The 30 inches--they expanded it to--that is so you don't have stairs outside. Remo: Below grade. Drueding: Yes. Below grade--we don't want people and fire trucks falling down and we don't want this moat effect going around town. Remo: But if it is 30 inches below grade and 30 inches above grade that is 5 feet. That is basically--you are not going to get a fire truck to get around that either. Drueding: That is not the only reason for it. Part is so we don't 3 BAM10.30.92 have all this moat area around buildings look like they are a 3- story building when actually they are a 2 story and they are looking down like this--to avoid that garden level. Remo: Did they have pools in mind when they-- Drueding: We have been dealing with the pools and the hot tubs. They are having to put them--they are complying by building a platform up. Rick: Mr. Campbell, could not this pool be moved over and abut the foundation wall of the house? Campbell: Yes. Rick: The reason this is 8 feet wide is so that he has a place that he can go like this in? Campbell: Correct. Rick: Why couldn't he just walk from one end and turn around and walk back. If, for instance we only gave--by statute you are allowed to have a pool here that goes all the way to the foundation wall in which case you wouldn't need a variance. Campbell: That's right. And-- Rick: So why would we grant you this variance if this could be accomplished in some other fashion? Campbell: There is a door here which is access to this courtyard. Gardenswartz: The idea is that we didn't want somebody to be able to walk out accidentally and step into the pool. Remo: How much distance is there from the door to the pool now? Campbell: 4 and 1/2 feet. Remo: Well, I could still take one step and go into the pool. I think that is a safety--you are talking about the health, safety and welfare. It doesn't sound like that consideration has been given there to somebody stepping out of that door. Gardenswartz: If you do it this way at least you have got a step before you are going to hit the pool. Otherwise you open the door you are right into the pool. That is the reason. Remo: With new construction at this point it is not like there is a door there right now. You can move the door someplace else I am 4 BAM10. 30.92 sure. This is at a stage in construction where you can, if you really want that pool in there, make changes to fit your pool in there it seems to me. Anne: If this is a garage why couldn't the pool go right here? Campbell: If you did it would still come out like that. Anne: What is the size of this thing? Rick: It is 8 and 1/2 by 6. Gardenswartz: The doctor told me that he thought it had to be at least that width. He didn't explain why he can't go back and forth instead of going around. As I understand it there is going to be some sort of a harness activity. Maybe that has something to do with it. He is going to be doing some sort of walking in the water with a harness as one of his exercises. I don't know that. Anne: Couldn't he go to the club and do this? Gardenswartz: I asked about that. The problem with the club is the consistency on the belt. Drueding: Before he got his building permit was proposed and we told him he couldn't do it. Campbell: The pool was shown on the drawing. It is a different pool from what we are proposing now. The dimensions are approximately the same. It is a pre-manufactured resistance swimming pool called a Swimex. It is only 4 feet deep so we could have put that in and that was the original plan. This summer after we started construction he was at Duke and this is when the doctor proposed the deeper pool. That is why we are here now. Drueding: The Planning Department's opinion was if this pool is so necessary it could have been incorporated in the building. We have got a new duplex building there. It seems like the pool could have been inside or designed at least within the setbacks. Campbell: Something changed within the course of construction. We complied with the code originally. This is a new matter. Gardenswartz: It was designed to be only a 4 foot pool. And that is why it was designed this way. We didn't think we would need to be here. Then when he found out through his doctor that it had to be deeper than that at that point in time the building was there- -everything was in place and we now need to have a pool that needs to go an extra foot deeper than we could go otherwise. 5 BAM10.30.92 Drueding: When was this building started? Campbell: We started construction in June. Ron: Someone said this is a duplex building. Is it divided into 2 units and who owns the other half. Campbell: He owns them both right now. Ron: Is he constructing this building? Did he buy the original lot and then hired you to construct this building for him? Campbell: Yes. Ron: At Duke Center for Living, is that in-patient or out-patient? Gardenswartz: He was there for 10 days as sort of an in patient. He goes back periodically. Ron: In other words you go in there and they take care of diet and they give you these exercises and everything else. It is a health regimen situation for a limited period of time and then extended visits are an out-patient basis. Gardenswartz: Right. (Mrs. Rudd came in) Ron: You mentioned that this is a right that his neighbors have that were withheld if this variance was not granted. Gardenswartz: I think the right that he has is to build a 5 foot deep pool that his neighbors have. And the right to do a 5 foot deep pool 30 inches above and 30 inches below. Remo: We are not denying him that right. Gardenswartz: We understand that. And I think that the right that his neighbors have are the right to have an exercise room or have something that they need to do for their health. And what he needs for his health is a pool. He can't do a Stairmaster. He can't do the things that maybe you and I would think of as typical exercises that his neighbors-- Remo: They don't have that by right. They have it by choice. A right is something that--we are not denying him a right either. He could have it inside the house. It has all been there. We haven't taken anything away from him. It just allows him to do everything--he is allowed to do. Their neighbors have complied. No one has done a pool 6 feet. So comparison with something that 6 BAM10.30.92 a neighbor has that he is being denied--an exercise room in a neighbor's house is no parallel to a variance for a pool because of his particular needs. The other thing is if he sells the house we are encumbered with a situation of something that is no longer pertinent and that is forever. Gardenswartz: You are not because Mr. Rudd has told me and has authorized me to tell you that he will deed restrict this property. He will put on whatever restrictions you want on there because he is serious about that if he sells this house he will bring this pool into compliance either by making this 30 inches on this end of the pool--filling it in--bring it into the setback. He is willing to do that. Ron: That's true. The City Attorney has told us that deed restrictions really don't have a great deal of bearing on any decisions we make. We should not make any decision based on a deed restriction. Anne: It has been recommended to us not to do that. Gardenswartz: Well, it is an obligation to Mr. Rudd. If Mr. Rudd were to sell this in violation of that there would be penalties. He would have to pay something. At some point in time the guy is willing to say "I am going to deed restrict this thing to bring it into compliance when I sell it and whatever expense goes with that I am willing to do that. That is how important this is to me" . I don't know that you can't believe that he is going to do that. Susan Rudd: Leslie really is a health risk. It isn't--we are not just saying that. He is 360 pounds. He is 53 years old. And this really is his form of exercise. And we are moving here. We have sold our house in Kansas and he really wants to spend the rest of his life--but the next couple of years getting in shape. And he can't walk. Ron: I personally understand all of this. But I don't understand- -and that is why would the man with those medical problems put himself at risk by moving to an altitude where all--from what I understand--heart problems are excellerated in the altitude. Rudd: Actually he has never had any heart problems. He has high blood pressure that just happened. He is actually a very healthy guy. He used to do 5 or 6 miles a day but now he just can't do it until he gets the weight off. In the pool he actually wears belts and then it is running in the water. Anne: We are supposed to grant a minimum variance. And if this 7 BAM10. 30.92 pool can be made slightly narrower and set closer to the house then you don't need a variance. Gardenswartz: The minimum variance we need is a foot. Anne: But right now you have got half of the pool over. Rick: You are talking about a foot in depth. Remo: But the request is not for that. The request is for 6 feet. MPT Gardenswartz: We are allowed 5 foot. Anne: But they would have to be above grade. Remo: Your variance is for 3 and 1/2 feet. Gardenswartz: Our variance is to build a 6 foot pool. Remo: Your variance request I thought was to go down from grade level. Gardenswartz: It is. To 6 feet. Remo: But that is not the minimum variance that we could grant you. You could go 30 inches up, 30 inches down. That is 5 feet. All you need is 12 . That is a minimum variance. Gardenswartz: You are right. What I would say to you is that I think that doesn't make sense. You ought to have the whole thing below grade. If you are going to grant it, the whole thing ought to be below grade. Remo: Why would you say that? Ron: Because the visual impact-- Remo: What visual impact? There is a stone wall around it. Anyway he is allowed to have 30 inches. Ron: If I am going to grant this variance at all I would just as soon let them put it in below grade. Remo: I wouldn't. Anne: I agree. I would rather see it below grade. If you pull it over this way there is less space impact over the setback too. 8 BAM10.30.92 Gardenswartz: If we can pull it over so that we can still have the same width maybe we only come out a foot. Rick: What does that door access now? Gardenswartz: The bathroom. That is how he is going to access the pool. Anne: Maybe the whole pool could be put up against the house and moved forward a foot this way. MPT Anne: Since it is new construction--since it could have been planned in there better earlier, I think if you came back with less impact over the setback it might more palatable. Gardenswartz: The pool is important. And we are willing to make it have a minimal impact and if that means under Remo's scenario you go up 30 inches and you go down 42 inches, that is a possibility to get the 6 foot pool. If it means that we bring it closer to the house-- Remo: I think it is a combination of both of those. Anne: Right now I see this as the ideal situation for the owner. I want them to make some compromises and come back and say "We will cut back from our impact on the setback. We will cut back on the depth. Or whatever" . I don't have a problem going 6 feet into the ground. Gardenswartz: I understand what you are saying. I was thinking that the ultimate compromise was to say we are going to deed restrict this thing so that the pool is gone. Anne: It is the policing of that. Rick: A question for Mr. Campbell: Could this be accomplished by moving it and butting it up against the existing house foundation? Campbell: I think we would still need a variance. Rick: What if we gave you a foot into the setback? Could you live with that? What about the door to the bathroom--the shower? Can you move that down the hall? Campbell: Anything is possible. Rick: I would be in favor of doing that if you need a foot or something like that in here. I could go for that. We are really 9 BAM10. 30.92 charged with giving you the minimum. The absolute bare minimum and that seems to fit the bill. Remo: The bare minimum would also include going up 30 inches. Rick: Yes. I could go for that. Gardenswartz: At that point in time it wouldn't be a problem with the door removed because you wouldn't walk into a 30 inch step. Anne: Actually with snow in the winter I suppose 30 inches above grade would be better because you have got your snow depth. Rick: What is the distance from the existing foundation wall to the setback? Campbell: It is about 9 and 1/2 feet. Rick: And you are asking for 8 and 1/2 feet. So you have actually got a foot to play with. Gardenswartz: Well then the pool fits in there. Rick: But you have got foundation walls. A 6 inch foundation wall on either side. You need another 3 or 4 to 6 inches. If you are out an inch or 2, we are not going to-- Remo: No, we wouldn't. Rick: And then if you could build this thing 3 feet above grade- Campbell: We wouldn't have to at that point. Gardenswartz: At that point we could go down 6 feet. Remo: He could go down 6 feet and he don't even need us here. He doesn't need a variance. Anne: But if he needs a little bit of a variance, then he needs to come back. We can't make an arbitrary decision today, but if you need a foot we will give you a foot. We need to see what you are going to do with it. Campbell: Let's go back to something that was said earlier about the intent of the code. Because there is nothing in that ordinance that even addresses pools. It is very specific and specifically does not address pools. And I am wondering why. Remo: Because it is a matter of fire engines getting in there and that is a safety factor. 10 BAM10. 30.92 Campbell: That doesn't make any sense at all. Remo: That is what it says. It is a safety factor. Campbell: Why should fire trucks want to go a little bit more to the edge of the setback because the setback is different in different places around the lot. All over town the setback are different. Rick: There is a wall all around this whole thing too. Remo: What is the purpose of the 30 inches going down? Drueding: It is a safety factor. That is one of the reasons. Campbell: Can you get more specific? Drueding: The firemen go running around the side of the house and they fall into this 6 foot hole. Campbell: Yes, but at the point of the setback they will fall into the 6 foot hole. Gardenswartz: If we move the pool right here they are still going to fall into a 6 foot pool. Remo: They have the setback then. Drueding: The purpose of the setbacks is we don't want clutter. We don't want holes. We don't want things sticking up. It is visual. There is safety. All of these reasons we have gone over many times. Gardenswartz: I don't think this is visual. Drueding: In general these are the reasons for setbacks. Gardenswartz: I don't think safety as a safety for firemen-- Remo: Well, there is a safety. The setback is between houses from this piece of property to the next. Gardenswartz: The way it is designed right here they have better to get around than they would coming around this way. Remo: It is marginal both ways. Rick: How big is the foundation wall supporting the house? 11 BAM10. 30.92 Campbell: 10 inches. Rick: Would that retain that kind of water pressure if you just butted up against it and not even build an extra-- Campbell: I don't know. Remo: Do you have to build this pool from scratch? Or is this a ready-made. Campbell: It is from scratch. Rick: I don't see that you need a variance. If you need a foot or a couple of inches somewhere then you can come back and see us but at this point I can't see anything to hang my hat on. Remo: It would be difficult to give a variance. I don't think the Board is ready to grant you one based on the information that you have given us when there are other solutions that would at least minimize the variance considerably than what you are presenting to us today. The code was designed for the citizenry in general rather than one specific person. We have had this come up before where a person has come to us for a therapeutic pool in the setback and we were concerned about them selling the house and then we would be stuck with this pool. And it is exactly what happened. Gardenswartz: Can we table this? Remo: Absolutely. Gardenswartz: We will know by this afternoon whether we even need to come back. If we do need 3 or 4 inches-- Remo: I will be here this afternoon if you need to table to a date certain. After discussion-- Remo: Let's pick a date right now to table to just in case we need it. MOTION Rick: I move to table is case #92-14 to date certain of November 23rd at 4 : OOpm. Ron seconded the motion with all in favor. 12 BAM10.30.92 MINUTES Rick: I move to approve minutes of #92-13 Anne seconded the motion with all in favor. Meeting was adjourned. Time was 1: 10pm. J Janice Carney, City Deputy erk It should be noted that Mr. Rudd's Attorney, Ted Gardenswart , sent a letter withdrawing his request for variance dated November 9, 1992 . (attached in record) 13 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DATE September 199_ CASE # � '1 APPLICANT Leslie J. Rudd PHONE MAILING ADDRESS P 0 Box 1968, Wi chi to—Kanaac A77L12 OWNER Leslie J. Rudd PHONE MAILING ADDRESS P 0 Box 968 Wichita Kansas 67202 LOCATION OF PROPERTY 200 West Hallam Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (Street, Block Number and Lot Number) WILL YOU BE REPRESENTED BY COUNCIL? YES X NO Below, describe clearly the proposed variance, including all dimensions and justification for the variance. (Additional paper may be used if necessary. ) The building permit application and any other information you feel is pertinent should accompany this application, and will be made part of this case. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein Applicant's Signature es i u By Ted D. Garden ------ ates, ------------------------------ P.C. , as attorney- in-fact REASONS FOR DENIAL OF BUILDING PERMIT, BASED ON THE ASPEN CITY CODE, CHAPTER 24. AN OPINION CONCERNING THIS VARIANCE WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD BY THE ZONING DEPARTMENT STAFF. DATE PERMIT DENIED OFFICIAL DATE OF APPLICATION HEARING DATE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CASE #92-14 LESLIE J. RUDD 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: OCTOBER 29, 1992 Time: 4 : 00 p.m. Owner for Variance: Appellant for Variance: Name: LESLIE J. RUDD TED GARDENSWARTZ Address: 300 WEST HALLAM Location or description of property: 300 WEST HALLAM Variance Requested: PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE R-C ZONING CATEGORY. CHAPTER 24 SEC 3-101 (A) (5) ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE: SLABS, PATIOS WHICH DO NOT EXCEED 30 INCHES ABOVE OR BELOW GRADE ARE PERMITTED INTO REQUIRED SETBACKS. APPLICANT APPEARS TO BE REQUESTING TO PLACE A THERAPEUTIC POOL IN THE SETBACK EXCEEDING THE 30 INCH BELOW GRADE MAXIMUM; ONE OF 6 FEET DEEP BELOW GRADE. Will applicant be represented by counsel: Yes: X No: The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Jan Carney Deputy City Clerk EXIT "All The proposed variance is an encroachment into the rear yard set back in order to build a 6 foot deep therapy pool. A drawing showing the proposed location of the therapy pool is attached. The drawing shows the required set backs and illustrates that any alternate location of the pool would cause a more severe side or front yard encroachment. The owner's architect, William B. Campbell, has been advised by the City's zoning officer that pools projecting into required set backs may not be deeper than 30 inches. As an initial matter, the land use regulations governing "projections into required yards" allows certain projections into the yard without restriction. Therapy pools (and even swimming pools) are not addressed by the Land Use Regulations. Thus, there is some question as to whether the proposed pool even requires a variance. Even if the Land Use Regulations were interpreted to exclude a 6 foot deep projection (although a 30" deep projection would be permitted) , there are special conditions and circumstances unique to this parcel and the health needs of the applicant. In that regard, a letter from applicant's doctor, Fred R. Cobb, M.D. , is attached hereto. As you can see, the medical needs of Mr. Rudd will be served by allowing this 6' deep therapy pool. The minimum dimensions of the therapy pool are 816" X 1810" X 610" deep. These dimensions are dictated by the intended therapeutic use of the pool for water aerobics and resistance swimming. In short, the requested variance is necessary for the applicant, will allow him to enjoy the rights of other owners in the area and if denied would cause unnecessary hardship to him. Under these circumstances, and considering the encroachment only relates to the depth of the pool (which will be fenced) , a variance is requested. ,., max.'-•°. DUKE = r CENTER -FOR- LIVING $ re August 14, 1992 To Whom It May Concern: Re: Leslie Rudd NX. . .#J7 0 513 Mr. Leslie Rudd is a gentleman who has participated at the Duke Center for Living at Dube University Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina, and now returns to his home to continue with a nutrition and exercise program. His problems include significant obesity and hypertension. Because of the patient's significant obesity and risk of joint trauma and pain with impact exercises, we suggest that Mr. Rudd do the majority of his exercises in the pool. These exercises can include pool walking, aquatic aerobics or swimming. If you have any questions or comments regarding this request please do not hesitate to contact us. We appreciate your coopera- tion. Sincerely, Aimee E. Jordan, P.A.-C. Fred R. Cobb, M.D. Director, Duke Center for Living FRC:ma Duke University Medical Center Box 3022 Durham,NC 27710 919-660-6600 =t - I - - - -- - - - - -�-- - \ I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I i I � O " I � I I I -I- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I L LA v 2 5 �0 20 -mod W.- HAq L4,A M ,E;-r Pt�611 -CIO _. Sanctity 'qj C0404" STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC. 602 E. HYMAN•ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 •(303)925-3577 August 19 , 1992 Bill Campbell 175 Big Hat Basalt , CO 81621 RE : 300 foot surrounding property owners of Leslie G . Rudd Dear Sir , A search of the records of this office and those of the Assessors and Treasurers of Pitkin County , Colorado reveals the following owners on attached Exhibit "A" . Although we believe the facts stated are true , this letter is not to be construed as an abstract of title , nor an opinion of title , nor a guaranty of title , and it is understood and agreed that Stewart Title of Aspen , Inc . , neither assumes , nor will be,-charged with any financial obligations or liability whate-Ger on any statement contained herein . Sincerely , ';i� g � , �cca Hazel I . Herwick Title Examiner Enclosure LAW OFFICES OF OATE S, HUGHES & KNEZEVICH PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR,ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 AREA CODE 303 ROBERT W. HUGHES TELEPHONE 920-1700 RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH TELECOPIER 920-1121 TED D. GARDENSWARTZ OF COUNSEL: JOHN THOMAS KELLY November 9, 1992 Jan Carney Board of Adjustment City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Variance Application - Leslie Rudd Dear Jan: Leslie Rudd hereby withdraws his variance application relating to the therapy pool. Accordingly, please remove Mr. Rudd from the calendar on Monday, November 23, 1992 . Also, I would appreciate it if you would convey my thanks to the four members who attended the last hearing. I appreciate their thoughtfulness, concern, comments and suggestions. Sincerely, OATES'; HUGHES & KNEZEVICH, P.C. By:- Ted D. `Gardenswartz TDG/sc cc: Leslie Rudd RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 30 1992 Chairman Remo Lavagnino called meeting to order at 12 : 00 noon. Answering roll call were Ron Erickson, Anne Austin, Rick Head and Remo Lavagnino. CASE #92-14 LESLIE J. RUDD Remo read into record request for variance. (attached in record) Ted Gardenswartz, Representative for applicant: Presented affidavit of posting and of mailing. (attached in record) Anne: What size lot do we have here? Remo: Is that considered a duplex lot? Gardenswartz: It is. Remo: Is it a duplex lot? Gardenswartz: Yes. Anne: These are 2 living units here? Gardenswartz: Yes. I am Ted Gardenswartz representing the applicant, Mr. Leslie Rudd. This is Bill Campbell who is the architect on the project for Mr. Rudd. I think it is important to put this into perspective. This is a therapy pool for Mr. Rudd. And I read the Land Use Code and as somebody characterized earlier generally projections which do not exceed 30 inches below grade can't go in the setback. What this application is all about is putting this therapy pool into the setback. As you can see from the drawing the therapy pool has to be deeper than 30 inches in order for it to have any impact and any use for Mr. Rudd. As an initial matter, Mr. Rudd is planning to move here with his family. He is about 6 foot 2 and weights over 365 pounds. He is 52 years old. He has been diagnosed by doctors at Duke University as having serious heart and blood pressure problems that are related to his obesity. The reason we are here is he wants to build this therapy pool and the pool needs to be 6 feet deep. The idea of the pool is that he can do water aerobic activity in the pool that he cannot do according to his doctors on the ground because of his weight which causes significant problems to his joints, to his ligaments, etc. So it is not as though he can go jogging around. BAM10.30.92 In a nutshell what we are seeking to do is just go 3 and 1/2 feet deeper than the 2 and 1/2 feet we could go in building this pool. And I would say I guess as an initial matter it seems to me that the visual impact of going an extra 3 and 1/2 feet is non-existent because the pool is there and it is 2 feet deeper or 10 feet deep I don't think it has any different visual impact from the street or from the neighbors perspective or anyone else. So I don't think that that should be an issue. The real issue is the need for the therapy. As you can see from the map there really is nowhere else on the lot for the therapy pool. It can't really go any closer to the house. As I understand it that is pretty much a bedroom there or a bathroom there and for safety reasons and other reasons they don't want to have it any closer to the house. All of you have seen Dr. Cobb's follow-up letter. (attached in record) and I guess what I should probably do is sort of go through this using your criteria as to what you consider. Obviously granting a variance should be consistent with the goals and objectives of the code. The purpose here is to enhance and foster the public health of Mr. Rudd and I don't know how to say this without sounding corny. But it seems to me that given his obesity, given the efforts that' he has tried for years to deal with this and given the fact that it now is at a point where his blood pressure or his heart is such that it is getting more and more critical for him that to some extent I guess I would analogize this to some sort of a prescription on a healing art sort of level. And I don't want to be cynical about that because I think that in real life that is where he is. And I think that is what his doctors are saying and I guess it is difficult to imagine getting to that point maybe for US. But Mr. Rudd is there and he needs this and this is really his--getting to his last efforts to try to deal with his problem. Your code also talks about variances that will make a reasonable use of the parcel or structure. I think it is important to bear in mind we are only looking to go 3 and 1/2 feet deeper than we are allowed. The pool needs to be 6 feet. He is going to do his water aerobics with harnesses and he has got to be standing apparently at least shoulder depth. I have an article that the doctor faxed me. It talks about how when one is submerged up to one's shoulders in the water, 90% of the weight is removed. So he needs to have the pool to be at least that deep to have the effect that is intended to have. He also needs it to be of a size in order for him to motor around in the pool so that he can get the intended aerobic benefits of this. 2 BAM10. 30.92 I think a literal interpretation of your code deprives Mr. Rudd of rights commonly enjoyed by others and certainly would work a practical difficulty. It seems to me if I were reading the code that if Mr. Rudd were so inclined, he could build a pool that would be 5 feet deep by essence of going 30 inches above grade and 30 inches below grade. So the practical difficulty--he could have a 5 foot deep pool if he wanted to. If he had a 5 foot deep pool he could fill it up to 4 feet 6 or 7 inches of water. I don't know how much would be displaced but I think what we are really talking about is one foot. And I think that is the practical difficulty here. And I would submit that these visual impacts of having a pool totally below grade rather than having the 30 inches above and 30 inches below would be much less of a visual impact for all the neighbors. Remo: You are putting a wall in, right? Gardenswartz: Yes. And I understand the argument well that this is a new structure. And I understand the position that he should have thought about this earlier. He should have designed this pool to fit in there earlier. He didn't. The pool was not planned ahead of time. He was at the Duke University this summer. I don't think he should be punished for that. I think that he is not trying to end-run anything. He is not trying to get some sort of a benefit. He is just trying to get this pool to help him. And it is not, I don't think, a special privilege. I think he could build a smaller pool if that would work for him and his doctor said it wouldn't. He could build a pool a foot shallower. And I don't think that would work either. And I think on a human level what he is asking for is not that much. And he is asking for your help so that he can do what his doctors want him to do. Remo: What intent of putting it--what is the 30 inch below grade. How does the City arrive at that figure. Drueding, Zoning Dept: That has been part of the code since I have been here. The 30 inches--they expanded it to--that is so you don't have stairs outside. Remo: Below grade. Drueding: Yes. Below grade--we don't want people and fire trucks falling down and we don't want this moat effect going around town. Remo: But if it is 30 inches below grade and 30 inches above grade that is 5 feet. That is basically--you are not going to get a fire truck to get around that either. Drueding: That is not the only reason for it. Part is so we don't 3 BAM10. 30.92 have all this moat area around buildings look like they are a 3- story building when actually they. are a 2 story and they are looking down like this--to avoid that garden level. Remo: Did they have pools in mind when they-- Drueding: We have been dealing with the pools and the hot tubs. They are having to put them--they are complying by building a platform up. Rick: Mr. Campbell, could not this pool be moved over and abut the foundation wall of the house? Campbell: Yes. Rick: The reason this is 8 feet wide is so that he has a place that he can go like this in? Campbell: Correct. Rick: Why couldn't he just walk from one end and turn around and walk back. If, for instance we only gave--by statute you are allowed to have a pool here that goes all the way to the foundation wall in which case you wouldn't need a variance. Campbell: That's right. And-- Rick: So why would we grant you this variance if this could be accomplished in some other fashion? Campbell: There is a door here which is access to this courtyard. Gardenswartz: The idea is that we didn't want somebody to be able to walk out accidentally and step into the pool. Remo: How much distance is there from the door to the pool now? Campbell: 4 and 1/2 feet. Remo: Well, I could still take one step and go into the pool. I think that is a safety--you are talking about the health, safety and welfare. It doesn't sound like that consideration has been given there to somebody stepping out of that door. Gardenswartz: If you do it this way at least you have got a step before you are going to hit the pool. Otherwise you open the door you are right into the pool. That is the reason. Remo: With new construction at this point it is not like there is a door there right now. You can move the door someplace else I am 4 BAM10. 30.92 sure. This is at a stage in construction where you can, if you really want that pool in there, make changes to fit your pool in there it seems to me. Anne: If this is a garage why couldn't the pool go right here? Campbell: If you did it would still come out like that. Anne: What is the size of this thing? Rick: It is 8 and 1/2 by 6. Gardenswartz: The doctor told me that he thought it had to be at least that width. He didn't explain why he can't go back and forth instead of going around. As I understand it there is going to be some sort of a harness activity. Maybe that has something to do with it. He is going to be doing some sort of walking in the water with a harness as one of his exercises. I don't know that. Anne: Couldn't he go to the club and do this? Gardenswartz: I asked about that. The problem with the club is the consistency on the belt. Drueding: Before he got his building permit was proposed and we told him he couldn't do it. Campbell: The pool was shown on the drawing. It is a different pool from what we are proposing now. The dimensions are approximately the same. It is a pre-manufactured resistance swimming pool called a Swimex. It is only 4 feet deep so we could have put that in and that was the original plan. This summer after we started construction he was at Duke and this is when the doctor proposed the deeper pool. That is why we are here now. Drueding: The Planning Department's opinion was if this pool is so necessary it could have been incorporated in the building. We have got a new duplex building there. It seems like the pool could have been inside or designed at least within the setbacks. Campbell: Something changed within the course of construction. We complied with the code originally. This is a new matter. Gardenswartz: It was designed to be only a 4 foot pool. And that is why it was designed this way. We didn't think we would need to be here. Then when he found out through his doctor that it had to be deeper than that at that point in time the building was there- -everything was in place and we now need to have a pool that needs to go an extra foot deeper than we could go otherwise. 5 BAM10. 30.92 Drueding: When was this building started? Campbell: We started construction in June. Ron: Someone said this is a duplex building. Is it divided into 2 units and who owns the other half. Campbell: He owns them both right now. Ron: Is he constructing this building? Did he buy the original lot and then hired you to construct this building for him? Campbell: Yes. Ron: At Duke Center for Living, is that-in-pat-ient- or out-patient? Gardenswartz: He was there for 10 days as sort of an in patient. He goes back periodically. Ron: In other words you go in there and they take care of diet and they give you these exercises and everything else. It is a health regimen situation for a limited period of time and then extended visits are an out-patient basis. Gardenswartz: Right. (Mrs. Rudd came in) Ron: You mentioned that this is a right that his neighbors have that were withheld if this variance was not granted. Gardenswartz: I think the right that he has is to ,build a 5 foot deep pool that his neighbors have. And the right to do a 5 foot deep pool 30 inches above and 30 inches below. Remo: We are not denying him that right. Gardenswartz: We understand that. And I think that the right that his neighbors have are the right to have an exercise room or have something that they need to do for their health. And what he needs for his health is a pool. He can't do a Stairmaster. He can't do the things that maybe you and I would think of as typical exercises that his neighbors-- Remo: They don't have that by right. They have it by choice. A right is something that--we are not denying him a right either. He could have it inside the house. It has all been there. We haven't taken anything away from him. It just allows him to do everything--he is allowed to do. Their neighbors have complied. No one has done a pool 6 feet. So comparison with something that 6 BAM10.30.92 a neighbor has that he is being denied--an exercise room in a neighbor's house is no parallel to a variance for a pool because of his particular needs. The other thing is if he sells the house we are encumbered with a situation of something that is no longer pertinent and that is forever. Gardenswartz: You are not because Mr. Rudd has told me and has authorized me to tell you that he will deed restrict this property. He will put on whatever restrictions you want on there because he is serious about that if he sells this house he will bring this pool into compliance either by making this 30 inches on this end of the pool--filling it in--bring it into the setback. He is willing to do that. Ron: That's true. The City Attorney has told us that deed restrictions really don't have a great deal of bearing on any decisions we make. We should not make any decision based on a deed restriction. Anne: It has been recommended to us not to do that. Gardenswartz: Well, it is an obligation to Mr. Rudd. If Mr. Rudd were to sell this in violation of that there would be penalties. He would have to pay something. At some point in time the guy is willing to say "I am going to deed restrict this thing to bring it into compliance when I sell it and whatever expense goes with that I am willing to do that. That is how important this is to me" . I don't know that you can't believe that he is going to do that. Susan Rudd: Leslie really is a health risk. It isn't--we are not just saying that. He is 360 pounds. He is 53 years old. And this really is his form of exercise. And we are moving here. We have sold our house in Kansas and he really wants to spend the rest of his life--but the next couple of years getting in shape. And he can't walk. Ron: I personally understand all of this. But I don't understand- -and that is why would the man with those medical problems put himself at risk by moving to an altitude where all--from what I understand--heart problems are excellerated in the altitude. Rudd: Actually he has never had any heart problems. He has high blood pressure that just happened. He is actually a very healthy guy. He used to do 5 or 6 miles a day but now he just can't do it until he gets the weight off. In the pool he actually wears belts and then it is running in the water. Anne: We are supposed to grant a minimum variance. And if this 7 BAM10. 30.92 pool can be made slightly narrower and set closer to the house then you don't need a variance. Gardenswartz: The minimum variance we need is a foot. Anne: But right now you have got half of the pool over. Rick: You are talking about a foot in depth. Remo: But the request is not for that. The request is for 6 feet. MPT Gardenswartz: We are allowed 5 foot. Anne: But they would have to be above grade. Remo: Your variance is for 3 and 1/2 feet. Gardenswartz: Our variance is to build a 6 foot pool. Remo: Your variance request I thought was to go down from grade level. Gardenswartz: It is. To 6 feet. Remo: But that is not the minimum variance that we could grant you. You could go 30 inches up, 30 inches down. That is 5 feet. All you need is 12 . That is a minimum variance. Gardenswartz: You are right. What I would say to you is that I think that doesn't make sense. You ought to have the whole thing below grade. If you are going to grant it, the whole thing ought to be below grade. Remo: Why would you say that? Ron: Because the visual impact-- Remo: What visual impact? There is a stone wall around it. Anyway he is allowed to have 30 inches. Ron: If I am going to grant this variance at all I would just as soon let them put it in below grade. Remo: I wouldn't. Anne: I agree. I would rather see it below grade. If you pull it over this way there is less space impact over the setback too. 8 BAM10. 30.92 Gardenswartz: If we can pull it over so that we can still have the same width maybe we only come out a foot. Rick: What does that door access now? Gardenswartz: The bathroom. That is how he is going to access the pool. Anne: Maybe the whole pool could be put up against the house and moved forward a foot this way. MPT Anne: Since it is new construction--since it could have been planned in there better earlier, I think if you came back with less impact over the setback it might more palatable. Gardenswartz: The pool is important. And we are willing to make it have a minimal impact and if that means under Remo's scenario you go up 30 inches and you go down 42 inches, that is a possibility to get the 6 foot pool. If it means that we bring it closer to the house-- Remo: I think it is a combination of both of those. Anne: Right now I see this as the ideal situation for the owner. I want them to make some compromises and come back and say "We will cut back from our impact on the setback. We will cut back on the depth. or whatever". I don't have a problem going 6 feet into the ground. Gardenswartz: I understand what you are saying. I was thinking that the ultimate compromise was to say we are going to deed restrict this thing so that the pool is gone. Anne: It is the policing of that. Rick: A question for Mr. Campbell: Could this be accomplished by moving it and butting it up against the existing house foundation? Campbell: I think we would still need a variance. Rick: What if we gave you a foot into the setback? Could you live with that? What about the door to the bathroom--the shower? Can you move that down the hall? Campbell: Anything is possible. Rick: I would be in favor of doing that if you need a foot or something like that in here. I could go for that. We are really 9 BAM10. 30.92 charged with giving you the minimum. The absolute bare minimum and that seems to fit the bill. Remo: The bare minimum would also include going up 30 inches. Rick: Yes. I could go for that. Gardenswartz: At that point in time it wouldn't be a problem with the door removed because you wouldn't walk into a 30 inch step. Anne: Actually with snow in the winter I suppose 30 inches above grade would be better because you have got your snow depth. Rick: What is the distance from the existing foundation wall to the setback? Campbell: It is about 9 and 1/2 feet. Rick: And you are asking for 8 and 1/2 feet. So you have actually got a foot to play with. Gardenswartz: Well then the pool fits in there. Rick: But you have got foundation walls. A 6 inch foundation wall on either side. You need another 3 or 4 to 6 inches. If you are out an inch or 2, we are not going to-- Remo: No, we wouldn't. Rick: And then if you could build this thing 3 feet above grade- Campbell: We wouldn't have to at that point. Gardenswartz: At that point we could go down 6 feet. Remo: He could go down 6 feet and he don't even need us here. He doesn't need a variance. Anne: But if he needs a little bit of a variance, then he needs to come back. We can't make an arbitrary decision today, but if you need a foot we will give you a foot. We need to see what you are going to do with it. Campbell: Let's go back to something that was said earlier about the intent of the code. Because there is nothing in that ordinance that even addresses pools. It is very specific and specifically does not address pools. And I am wondering why. Remo: Because it is a matter of fire engines getting in there and that is a safety factor. 10 BAM10. 30.92 Campbell: That doesn't make any sense at all. Remo: That is what it says. It is a safety factor. Campbell: Why should fire trucks want to go a little bit more to the edge of the setback because the setback is different in different places around the lot. All over town the setback are different. Rick: There is a wall all around this whole thing too. Remo: What is the purpose of the 30 inches going down? Drueding: It is a safety factor. That is one of the reasons. Campbell: Can you get more specific? Drueding: The firemen go running around the side of the house and they fall into this 6 foot hole. Campbell: Yes, but at the point of the setback they will fall into the 6 foot hole. Gardenswartz: If we move the pool right here they are still going to fall into a 6 foot pool. Remo: They have the setback then. Drueding: The purpose of the setbacks is we don't want clutter. We don't want holes. We don't want things sticking up. It is visual. There is safety. All of these reasons we have gone over many times. Gardenswartz: I don't think this is visual. Drueding: In general these are the reasons for setbacks. Gardenswartz: I don't think safety as a safety for firemen-- Remo: Well, there is a safety. The setback is between houses from this piece of property to the next. Gardenswartz: The way it is designed right here they have better to get around than they would coming around this way. Remo: It is marginal both ways. Rick: How big is the foundation wall supporting the house? 11 BAM10. 30.92 Campbell: 10 inches. Rick: Would that retain that kind of water pressure if you just butted up against it and not even build an extra-- Campbell: I don't know. Remo: Do you have to build this pool from scratch? Or is this a ready-made. Campbell: It is from scratch. Rick: I don't see that you need a variance. If you need a foot or a couple of inches somewhere then you can come back and see us but at this point I can't see anything to hang my hat on. Remo: It would be difficult to give a variance. I don't think the Board is ready to grant you one based on the information that you have given us when there are other solutions that would at least minimize the variance considerably than what you are presenting to us today. The code was designed for the citizenry in general rather than one specific person. We have had this come up before where a person has come to us for a therapeutic pool in the setback and we were concerned about them selling the house and then we would be stuck with this pool. And it is exactly what happened. Gardenswartz: Can we table this? Remo: Absolutely. Gardenswartz: We will know by this afternoon whether we even need to come back. If we do need 3 or 4 inches-- Remo: I will be here this afternoon if you need to table to a date certain. After discussion-- Remo: Let's pick a date right now to table to just in case we need it. MOTION Rick: I move to table is case #92-14 to date certain of November 23rd at 4 : OOpm. Ron seconded the motion with all in favor. 12 BAM10. 30.92 MINUTES Rick: I move to approve minutes of #92-13 Anne seconded the motion with all in favor. Meeting was adjourned. Time was 1: 10pm. Janice M. Carney, City Deputy Clerk It should be noted that Mr. Rudd's Attorney, Ted Gardenswartz, sent a letter withdrawing his request for variance dated November 9, 1992 . (attached in record) 13 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CASE #92-14 LESLIE G. RUDD 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: OCTOBER 30, 1992 Time: NOON Owner for Variance: Appellant for Variance: Name: LESLIE G. RUDD TED GARDENSWARTZ Address: 300 WEST HALLAM Location or description of propertV: 300 WEST HALLAM Variance Requested: PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE R-C ZONING CATEGORY. CHAPTER 24 SEC 3-101 (A) (5) ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE: SLABS, PATIOS WHICH DO NOT EXCEED 30 INCHES ABOVE OR BELOW GRADE ARE PERMITTED INTO REQUIRED SETBACKS. APPLICANT APPEARS TO BE REQUESTING TO PLACE A THERAPEUTIC POOL IN THE SETBACK EXCEEDING THE 30 INCH BELOW GRADE MAXIMUM; ONE OF 6 FEET DEEP BELOW GRADE. Will applicant be represented by counsel: Yes: X No: The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Jan Carney Deputy City Clerk OCT-29-1992 11:00 FROM LESLIE RUDD INU TO 1-0Z)9201121 P.01 10/29/92 10 59 DUKE CTR FOR Lt�'1�u -- I UKE CENTER LIVING A . .Ted .D... 'Gardenswartz I Z sq. Oates,:' Hughes & ICrie�evich,. �'.C•• 5.3,3, East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, ':C0 . .81G1'1 Re: Dear r2r. Gardenswartzt Rudd's medical This letter will Serve' tb further explain Mr•ro ram arid, more q-onditl0n' &x)d how a exercise and theeneed for 1 rg+ pool ,it relates to speci ficall,y, to q After . significant. evetluat vn . here at im n f aqua.ti,cYex Me rcises prescribed Mr.. Rudd a daily' reg Dint trauma and pain due tv `rile obesity arad the inherent risk of J our joint that is associated . with ' .impact exercises. recomm6ndations after the cons best, option and tile eon� that would aquat,iO exercises would be his provides him the most therapeutic benefits.. it is ' our opinion that in order fox the d pool to epr $,Gis wide and�l8m therapeutic. of fect, it. must be at least er form the various long. :These dime-ntions would allow Mr. ool walking , aquatic aerobics dxercites we- prescribed (iracludinq P and swamming)� in order to p of joint and ligament prevent the risk damage• Tt is our medical perci ], sn t roar m $gn f ritly these wou smaller that, d handicap his ex p sincerely,' pred _R: Cobb, M.D. 1�'izeGtor, Duke Center £or 'z,ivS 1e1g FRC:ma° Duke Uilivorsit}Meal liox i02? I)uCittu»,NC 277!�' Ti T1-;i I-1�