HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.20000309CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 9,
2000
Charles Paterson opened the Board of Adjustment meeting at 4:05 with Howard
DeLuca, Jim Iglehart, Bill Murphy present. David Scott and Rick Head were
excused. Deanna Olsen was absent. City staff in attendance: Sarah Oates,
Community Development ; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
MINUTES
PUBLIC HEARING:
CASE #00-01 RACQUEST CLUB CONDOMINIUMS, 1030 MATCHLESS
Charles Paterson opened the public hearing for 1030 Matchless, Racquet Club
Condominiums. Notice was provided with the list of mailing.
The applicant, Racquet Club Condominiums represented by John Howard of Willow
Creek Design Studio, requested a variance from the rear and side yard setback
dimensional requirements in order to construct four two-car garages in two detached
structures and a trash enclosure area. A portion of the proposed detached garage
would encroach into the required rear yard setback for accessory buildings,
requiring a 4½-foot rear yard setback variance. The proposed garage also requires a
14-foot side yard setback variance for the west side of Lot 2, and a 15 foot
combined side yard setback variance for both Lots 2 and 3. The two duplexes (four
(4) units total) are located on two lots in the R-6 zone district with a total 31,796
square feet of lot area. Each lot is 15,898 square feet which has the following
setback requirements: front yard setback at 10 feet; rear yard setback at 10
feet; combined front/rear at 30 feet; accessory buildings (rear) at 5 feet (½ foot
proposed setback); side yard setback at 15 feet (1 foot proposed setback); combined
side yard at 50 feet (35 foot proposed setback); floor area 2,486 square feet per
dwelling unit. Maximum Site Coverage was 22% per lot (3,497 square feet per
duplex).
John Howard stated that he tried to design under the land use code; he felt this was
the best placement of the garages. He said trees would be lost if the garages were
placed 30 feet away and that he felt there would be dangerous conditions because of
the loss of sun exposure. Howard felt that trash would collect in that 5-foot space
instead of building into the variance. He said that 10 of 14 property owners have
garages in this area.
Howard noted if the original builder could have built the property in a more
appropriate manner to begin with, then they would not have this problem of having
to build into the setbacks. Howard said the property was not R6 to begin with, but
changed at a later date.
1
CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 9,
2000
Barbara Carson, neighbor, stated concerned about the garages on the south side
because this would cut into the open space by placing the garages in that area,
which was their park area.
Jim Iglehart asked for clarification on the setbacks. Howard said the garages would
be within the property boundaries and the property line was at the railroad ties,
which would be replaced. Sara Oates explained the total setback was 50 feet.
Charles Paterson explained with only 4 members present, all 4 would have to vote
in favor of the variance in order for it to pass.
DeLuca asked if other variances had been granted for garages in this area. DeLuca
explained that the board was not at liberty to grant a variance on a monetary
hardship.
Iglehart said that he wasn’t opposed to have a garage and that he not concerned
about the side yard setback but was concerned about the 4½-foot rear yard.
DeLuca said that there was parking now and if the variance was granted it would
create a non-conformity by placing the garages where proposed. He asked for the
practical difficulty or hardship and he said that he did not see one.
Bill Murphy said he liked where the garages were proposed but the guidelines won’t
allow this because there was no practical difficulty or hardship.
DeLuca said the board was only to grant a minimum variance and he looked at the
lot and said it needed more thought to design where the garage would be located.
He said that building on the property line looks okay now, but a situation would be
created to cause a non-conformity.
Iglehart asked if they could come back with a minimum variance request for the
setback and brought back drawings
Paterson said that it made sense to place the garage against the railroad tie. Sarah
said R15 would have the same rear yard setback but the side yard would have been
different, but still not what was requested. Paterson said that he would vote for it.
th
MOTION: Howard DeLuca moved to continue to April 13 . Jim
Iglehart second. APPROVED. 4-0
2
CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 9,
2000
PUBLIC HEARING:
CASE #00-02 943 EAST COOPER, UNIT C
Charles Paterson stated that the hearing would be continued. Jackie Lothian noted
that it would have to go to HPC first. It would be continued to the May meeting.
The notice was provided.
MOTION: Howard DeLuca moved to continue the public hearing until
after the applicant was reviewed by HPC. Jim Iglehart second.
APPROVED 4-0.
The applicant withdrew the Board of Adjustment application and will be heard at
HPC for the variances requested.
Meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
3
CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 9,
2000
MINUTES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 1
CASE #00-01 RACQUEST CLUB CONDOMINIUMS, 1030 MATCHLESS ................................ ................... 1
CASE #00-02 943 EAST COOPER, UNIT C ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 3
4