Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19940203 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 3, 1994 4:00 P.M. SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM A G E N D A I. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL II. CASE #94-1 JAMES S. & FLORENCE P. ADAMS III. MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 1993 OCTOBER 14, 1993 IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS V. ADJOURN iC/ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 3, 1994 Vice Chairman Charlie Paterson called meeting to order at 4 : 10 P.M. Answering roll call were Howard DeLuca, Ron Erickson, Rick Head and Charlie Paterson. Jim Iglehart arrived shortly after roll call. Bill Martin and Remo Lavagnino were excused. MINUTES SEPTEMBER 30 & OCTOBER 14, 1993 Ron: I move that we accept minutes for Case #93-15, Grossblatt/ Getz, and #93-18, Bruce Berger, as submitted. Rick seconded the motion with all in favor. ELECTION Ron: I move we postpone election until Remo gets back. Rick seconded the motion with all in favor. CASE #94-1 JAMES S. & FLORENCE P. ADAMS Charlie opened the public portion of the hearing then read request for variance. (attached in record) James Adams made presentation as attached in record. Rick: What purpose does the adding parcel A and B do for your lot? Adams: When we first bought that lot we came in on a--we had a ROW all the way down from Smuggler Street in the old Aspen Town Site. The following year the Institute began building the Meadows. And they put in first the Meadows Road. And when they put that road in they followed a ditch line and stayed on the east side of it. When they passed our property they, of course, entered the major part of the Meadows area, they planted trees all the way along the west side of that old Meadows road at about 12 foot intervals. Those trees are now about 60 to 70 feet tall. And they essentially gave us that property from there over to our line. Rick: They being the Meadows? Adams: Yes. The Meadows. Rick: To Drueding--Isn't there some law that says that you cannot add property to your property for the purpose of accomplishing what is, in effect, a lot split--doing lot line adjustments for the purpose of adding density. BAM2 . 3 .94 Drueding: You just can't change a boundary line. But let me state--he has been reviewing this with the Planning Dept for a lot split. And obviously if he hadn't presented them with the proper survey and the Planning Dept hadn't agreed to what was there now we wouldn't be here. Adams: We have always had more square footage than legally necessary for an R-15 lot. Drueding: We are not granting him a variance to add any property or say this is a proper line. Rick: The variance is to give him minimum width necessary to accomplish the lot split. Drueding: Correct. Rick: We are talking 6 to 9 inches. Ron: We are allowing him to create a non-conforming lot. Drueding: You cannot create a non-conforming lot. Rick: We wouldn't by way of a variance grant him--one lot would be non-conforming. Drueding: Right. By a matter of inches. Yes. And therefore he could proceed through the Planning Dept and Planning & Zoning Commission for his lot split because this would now be considered a conforming lot according to the minimum lot width. Rick: Would you expand on what your hardship would be. Adams: My hardship is that I have always had a lot that conformed. Rick: So the old lot line was fine. Adams: Yes. The old lot line had enough square footage in it. It had the proper dimensions and it is still there. But we added dimensions on the east boundary only when we added those 2 parcels. Ron: What is the total size of the lot as it exists today? Adams: 33, 000 square feet. I deducted the sewer easement that goes through the west portion of the lot. Ron: Why did you do that? Adams: I don't know why I did that. But if you take that back, that is about 2,400 square feet. 2 BAM2 . 3 .94 Ron: You made a statement that without this additional space, you have 36,000 square feet. You added additional square footage of lot space when you added this eastern boundary piece of land. You made a statement through all the years that you added this piece, you always had a conforming lot in excess of 36, 000 feet. Now we are talking about a lot that with an additional piece of land you say is 33 , 000 square feet. So the numbers don't add up in my mind. Adams: I had deducted the sewer easement from that. We have 36,000 square feet total. Ron: How much square footage is that new piece of land that you added in 1991. Adams: We added about-- Rick: 25 feet by 150. Ron: That is 4,500 square feet. Rick: He is well over-- Rick: We are not here to discuss something that the Planning Office has already asked and analyzed. Ron: I don't think they have analyzed that. Drueding: I will look into that. What we are here for today is the assumption that this is correct. If it is not correct then we will pursue it with whatever means we have to. Howard: If the lot is 36, 000 square feet with this sewer running through it are you supposed to take that off? Drueding: No. Howard: If you take off 4, 500 square feet he still has a conforming lot. Rick: He had a lot that would have met all the requirements for a lot split before they added this additional property. Drueding: You would need a gross lot area--you need 15, 000 per side. Rick: I am looking at a survey here that shows 150 feet wide for an improvement survey made at some time back in 163 . It showed clearly that he had 150 foot frontage. And with the addition of the new property that was assembled-- 3 BAM2 . 3 .94 Howard: It is 150 by 214. Adams: I have got a note on exhibit C and it is 33,750. Drueding: He would need 30, 000 square feet at 15, 000 per lot required. Adams: We have always been over the required amount. Drueding: For a 10 foot variance--we are asking for 2 10-foot variances. He wants to do a lot split and in order to do this he has to have a conforming lot. So therefore we would have to find that this one dimension was--the 9 inches was OK. And also he has a house sitting--if he does a lot split right down the middle there and the house would be sitting right there. We don't want to make him tear down his house before so we are also asking for a side yard setback on both sides of this anticipated lot split. MPT Drueding: 2 10-foot setbacks. On an anticipated lot split I don't know how else to say it. Charlie: The lot split is going from east to west? Drueding: It would go right down the middle. Right through the middle of his house. So therefore on each side this house would now be encroaching that setback and this portion of the house would be encroaching in this setback. So we are asking that he get a variance for this so it is not non-conforming by setbacks either. Rick: So after the lot split of 75 and 75 and you take away 20 feet for the 2 side yard setbacks that leaves him 55 feet with which to build in the envelope. Drueding: What we are saying here because this house is there right now we cannot create this thing. Leslie Lamont and I decided this was the best way to get the setback variance also. If he decides not to do a lot split then he keeps his house. If you gave him the variance you would make that contingent on tearing down this house and having everything in conformity. Adams: The reason I asked for that is when we sell it we would like to live in that house until we get another house built down valley. And that is about 9 months. And I said to Leslie "How in the world do we handle this? Is there any chance in the world we can do that because by your rules if you were to give me a variance on the dimension problem and I went in and got my lot split we have 4 BAM2 . 3 .94 to tear the house down. She said the variance will be good for a year and we will be out of there in a year and the house will be down. Drueding: So he can do his lot split we don't make him tear his house down first and when the house goes then the variance you give him goes away. This is temporary. Ron: A variance goes in perpetuity with the property. Drueding: If he doesn't act on it. Ron: As soon as he finishes a new house down valley he won't need this house up here any longer. Adams: That is correct. Ron: So we could grant a variance which is good for one year until he acts on it which would be a minimum lot size giving him the right o split the lot. Now if he is given a lot split how much time do you have after we give him the lot split to tear down the house? Does it have to be done in 24 hours? 90 days? Charlie: All we have to do is give him the variance on the side yard setback as long as the old house is in place. As soon as that house is demolished that variance goes away. You don't have to put a time limit on it at all. Ron: I would not grant that variance because if he doesn't tear the house down in 9 months--he could leave it there for 15 years, he still has the lot split, he can build a house on that second lot. Drueding: No he can't. Because the present house-- Howard: Not unless he cuts the present one in half. It doesn't do any harm to leave the house on the lot as it is. But when it is torn down then the variance goes away for the lot for the side yard setback. Otherwise he is illegal and we are making him a non- conforming house by giving him a lot split and not giving him the 10 foot setback variance. Rick: The letter in the packet from Leslie states "Please be aware the variance will automatically expire after twelve months unless development commences" . 5 BAM2 . 3 .94 Drueding: I am sure if this were approved and then as a condition of a lot split the Planning & Zoning Commission would require-- they would determine how long that this would have to go. That would be one of their requirements that the house could not remain. That would be a condition of the lot split. At that time they may set a time. Charlie asked for public comment. There was none and he closed the public portion of the meeting. MOTION Ron: I recommend a motion that we grant the 9 inch variance on the east side of the property. Rick: Don't these go hand in hand? If we grant him one and deny him the other we have to have him tear the house down. Ron: No we don't. We don't have to have him do anything. Rick: It becomes non-conforming. Charlie: He can live in a non-conforming house. Ron: He gets his variance so he can proceed with his request. Right now he can't even proceed with his request for a lot split. Rick: But if we grant one and not the other he cannot proceed. I second the motion for the 9 inch variance. Roll call vote: Jim, yes, Howard, yes, Ron, yes, Rick, yes, Charlie, yes. Variance granted MOTION Drueding: From my understanding you cannot create a non-conforming lot not only dimensionally with the setbacks, we are right now he doesn't have a setback problem. We are creating a setback problem if we proceed with a lot split if the house is there. Ron: Is that our responsibility or is that the Building Department's responsibility to tell the applicant "All right, you have your lot split contingent on your removing the house" . Drueding: When the planner goes before P&Z we are saying "Yes this is--if we create this we are not creating a non-conforming lot in 6 BAM2 .3 .94 any way. We are not creating it by setbacks--Board of Adjustment has given us this variance now but in order to do this lot split the house would have to be removed. Planning & Zoning would make that condition. Rick: I don't' think that is our intent. Drueding: The Planning Dept was asking the Board of Adjustment to help facilitate Mr. Adams going through with his lot split. The Planning Dept could ask him "Well the only way we can do this is to tear your house down first" and the Planning Dept does not feel that is necessary. That is the hardship. MOTION Rick: I make a motion that we approve 2 10-foot side yard setbacks for purpose of accomplishing a lot split. Howard: I would like to amend that to say "As soon as that house is torn down there is no 10-foot side yard setback". Rick: The motion is we are granting 2 side yard 10-foot setback variances as long as the existing structure remains in it's present form and location. Howard seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Jim, yes, Howard, yes, Ron, no, Rick, yes, Charlie, yes. Variance granted. Meeting was adjourned. Time was 4:55 P.M. Janice M. arney, City Depu Clerk 7