Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19970313BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 13~ 1997 Charlie Paterson opened the regular meeting at 4:10 p.m. Jim Iglehart, Ron Erickson and Howard DeLuca were present. David Schott was excused. Rick Head and Dan Martineau were absent. City Staff present were David Hoefer and Sara Thomas. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CASE # 93-03~ LEWIS RESIDENCE - 935 GIBSON Charlie Paterson explained David Panico, architect for the applicant, requested a variance of eighteen foot (18') front yard set back from the public right-of-way to construct a garage. He asked Panico for the proof of notice of posting. David Hoefer explained that the notice provides proper notofocation and Mr. Panico may provide that notice subsquent to this hearing. Panico commented that the request was the same from the last meeting on 2/13/97. He said Ron Erickson's recollection of the prior restrictions on this parcel was correct. He noted the restrictions referred to the creation of a duplex with the condition of no more square footage or foot print additions. Panico stated there was no recorded resolution and Sara Thomas agreed. So, nothing traveled with the deed, and the current owner had no knowledge of these restrictions. He asked (as well as Mr. Lewis) asked if this deed restriction could be done. Erickson stated that during the late 1980's there were many cases before this board with many cases repeatedly applying for the same or more variances. He said there was an agreement between this board and the applicant because 3 members could not find the hardship. He stated that the agreement should stand. Panico noted there is a kitchen the previous owner does not use. Erickson commented the duplex was legalized in 1988. Panico said the present owner did not want to give up the duplex even though he wanted to proceed with the variance as previously stated on 2/13/97 with the garage and the room above it. Paterson asked about the hardship now for the garage and the room above it. Panico considered the parcel as defined with the 60' bisected right-of-way created 2 small triangular pieces of property and that is the hardship. One is unbuildable (used as parking) and the south parcel has the residence occupying the buildable space. Jim Iglehart stated the information given was to be determined how we voted the last meeting and asked if they are we now beginning again. Erickson stated that BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 13~ 1997 there was a very restrictive variance granted prior to this ownership and doesn't this negate the 2/13/97 vote to grant the variance. Erickson said that the alternative tonight would be to re-grant the variance and remove the deed restriction that was set 9 years ago. Hoefer agreed that was it the case and absent extremely good evidence, that should be set aside. Igelhardt asked if there was any deed restriction presently on the property. Hoefer noted there was a deed restriction, but it was not recorded. Iglehart questioned the non-recorded restriction's legality. Hoefer stated there was a decision of record which stated the variance for the duplex and no further variances will be granted. Hoefer said that a variance could be granted but there was an agreement. He further noted there was a clear hardship. Iglehart felt if it was not recorded, then it did not happen. Hoefer said this owner probably bought the property without any knowledge of this deed restriction. Erickson asked if that in fact was the case, what other remedies would the applicant have in this case. He said that it was only up to this board to rule on the cases that came before them. Erickson was concerned about legalizing the process of granting a variance and then taking away the conditions. The Board continued to discuss the past approval of the board on this property. David Panico noted there was a stone wall with a graveled parking area. Alan Becker, Public, (owns 950 Matchless Drive), stated there are 2 or 3 cars parked in the triangle. He was concerned with a view impedidiment for his property. Becker asked if it would exceed the height of the exisitng house with this addition of the loft area on top of the garage. Panico illustrated on the (demo) map. Panico asked the problems of parking in the neighborhood, congestion and so on, with 10 years of hind-sight, could those restictions be reviewed again and ruled or voted. Erickson recalled that the last time the illegal duplex was brought before was the hardship that their lawyer argued successfully. Howard DeLuca asked the intent of miniumizing the square footage. Erickson replied the arguments were the building was under the FAR. Panico said that Bill Drueding figured the square footage of the parcel with the 60 foot right-of-way which would make the allowable square footage 4200. Erickson read from the 3/31/88 minutes that the residece had been operated as a duplex with 2700 square feet at the time. He said the residence was legalized into a single family with conditions because of the non-conforming structure and anything done in the future would require a variance. Becker asked the additional square footage. Panico replied it was 600 on 2 stories. 2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 13~ 1997 Hoefer said that a variance was granted last time subject to the condition stated in the last approval which would cause the variance to be denied or is insignificant for the variance is granted as it was the last time. Panico asked if the process allowed him further consideration if a vote was forced. Hoefer stated that he could always re-apply, asked for a straw vote or with-draw. Panico asked if the board could re- scend the 1988 ruling. Hoefer stated that could not be done by this board. Iglehart noted that he could ask for continuance after the board deliberates. Paterson asked the board for comments. DeLuca said the garage was no problem, it was the FAR above the garage but the 60' easement was a hardship. He said it was set up that no additional square footage could be added to this duplex, and would consider the garage but not the loft addition. Erickson commended Panico for a fine job done, and his service on this board was not intended to cause hardship by recalling the prior variance. He said there was an agreement made in 1988 with the intent was no more development on this lot. He said the applicant had a hardship, but it was not the fault of this board. Thomas noted that variances are now recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. Iglehart said that he felt the applicant should receive the variance based upon the ownership. Schott said he wanted to hear some more information on this case. Iglehart questioned if it was or was not a duplex at this point. DeLuca said if the second kitchen were removed then it would be easier to grant the variance. Erickson reiterated that it was made a legal duplex at the 1988 hearing with the conditions. Hoefer noted the variance was legal without being recorded, so the duplex legally exists because the variance was granted. DeLuca commented on the deed restriction preventing any building on the other side of the street and the parcel could not be subdivided. Erickson said the duplex stood as it was without being able to be added onto in the future, existing foot-print of the house (square footage) remain the same. He stated by granting any variance now, it would rescend the 1988 variance and conditions. Panico asked the board that there is no inconsistent prior variances 3 ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT COMMISSION March 13, 1997 Charles paterson opened the meeting at 4:l0 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Board members present were: David Schott, Jim Iglehart, Pon Erickson, Howard DeLuca and Charles Paterson. Staffin attendance: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Sara Thomas, City Zoning Officer, Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. PUBLIC HEARING: 935 GIBSON- Lewis C'a ~ 4¢ cq 7-~3 Charles Paterson opened the public hearing for Mr. and Mrs. Tom Lewis requesting a variance of 18 feet in the front yard set back from the public right-of- way to construct a garage. This hearing was in response to the Board's request conditioning the February 13, 1997 variance approval for prior provisions and deed-restrictions placed on this property. David Panico was the representative for applicant, Mr. And Mrs. Tom Lewis:; The applicant requested a variance to waive the provision that no additional sqUare footage be permitted on the structure in order to allow for construction of a garage with a loft bedroom: The duplex existed legally. The prior deed-restriction was not recorded. The Board discussed remedies and problems from previous owners, deed- restrictions, parking problems and congestion in the area. The parcel was divided into two sections but could not be subdivided. The board could modify the variance that was granted. The applicant requested changing the duplex back to a single-family residence and returning to the board for the variance for a garage. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to table'and continue the public hearing for Case #97-03, Lewis for an 18-foot variance for a garage to April 3, 1997. Jim Iglehart seconded. APPROVED 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m. ~t{ckie Lothi~.~e'Puty City Clerk