Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19990617CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 17, 1999 Charles Paterson opened the special City of Aspen Board of Adjustment meeting at 4:05 p.m. Board members Howard DeLuca, Rick Head, David Schott, Jim Iglehart and Charlie Paterson were present. Staff in attendance: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Sara Thomas, City Zoning Officer; Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. PUBLIC HEARING: CASE #99-04 SCHRAMM, 0105 PTIKIN MESA DRIVE Charles Paterson, Chairman, opened the public hearing and John Wheeler, representative for the applicant, provided proof of notice. Wheeler explained the site was a thin narrow ribbon that ran through Cemetery Lane and Red Mountain Butte ; like many other parcels in that area, this one was also non-conforming. He said the proposal was for a modest expansion on a duplex, which was at half of the allowable build-out. There would be 600 square feet added to the existing 1900 square feet and he said that he believed they were allowed 4,300 square feet. He noted the existing structure encroaches into the setback currently; they did not want to increase that but use that line of the structure to transform that interior space, which was now a garage, into living space. Wheeler said by creating the upper level living space, there would be a carport below; he would also like to look at the possibility of enclosing the carport structure. He said there was not a rear yard encroachment at this time. Wheeler stated that he contacted the adjacent property owners, lot#12, and they had no problem with the expansion as shown. Rick Head asked where the bath was located for the new bedroom. Wheeler answered that it was located behind the master bedroom and there will be a rail around the deck. Roget Kuhn, public, stated that he was the neighbor and new owner of the lot next door. He commented that he was not notified of this variance request. David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, noted that the notice was legal and since Kuhn just purchased the property, his name would not appear on the assessor’s list at the time of posting. Kuhn stated the present building was 4’4” away from the lot line; this was of concern because it was so tight and he wanted the setback at 10’. He said that he felt the addition would take away from his view. Austine Stitt, public, stated that she was still the current owner of the property (next door), because the closing had not yet happened. She responded that (from their point of view) this would have little impact from where the house was located and would in fact be an enhancement to the neighborhood. A letter was included in the record from Ms. 1 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 17, 1999 Stitt dated May 21, 1999. Head asked what view would be interrupted if this addition were done. Wheeler did not think that the view would be effected and provided photos of the area from the property looking out over Cemetery Lane. Kuhn stated that he doesn’t want this addition to affect him and that he may not be allowed to obtain a variance in the future. He said it was like rewarding someone for having a non-conforming structure. Charlie Paterson explained that each variance was judged on its own merit and had nothing to do with any other case. Wheeler said Lot#12 was also encumbered on the rear property line of the parcel and non-conforming because of Pitkin Mesa Road. Wheeler stated there were 2 different surveys; the shed would need to be relocated. Kuhn said that he just had a survey done. Jim Iglehart stated that he had no questions. Head noted this was difficult sight and deferred to staff comments with no reasonable other place to put an addition. He said it was one of those practical difficulty situations. Howard DeLuca said that it was a duplex and asked what happens to the guy who was attached and asked for the same consideration. Paterson said there was no precedent setting situation. Wheeler said the view plane towards Red Butte might be slightly affected. DeLuca said that he was not concerned about view because the lot in back was higher. DeLuca noted the shed was just an enclosure for trash. The shed was slated to be removed. David Schott said that it was a practical difficulty. Paterson stated no objection. Head asked if they were coming in for a garage or a carport. Wheeler said it would be a garage. MOTION: Jim Iglehart move d to recommend approving the six foot (6’) side yard setback variance to allow for the expansion of the existing non-conforming structure located 0150 Pitkin Mesa Drive, City of Aspen, finding that the review standards have been met. Rick Head second. Roll call vote: DeLuca, no; Schott, yes; Iglehart, yes; Head, yes; Paterson, yes. APPROVED 4-1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 17, 1999 CASE #99-05 NOLAN, 308 NORTH FIRST STREET Charles Paterson, Chairman, opened the public hearing. David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, stated the notice was provided with the list of adjacent property owners; it met the jurisdictional requirements of this board. Stan Clauson, Planner for the applicant, presented the plat noting that the lot had been split by City Council. He utilized a colored plat showing the lot split; he said that it was the intention of the owner to remove certain portions to create a conforming situation for Lot #2 and allow development on Lot #1. He said the lot split was granted contingent on creating a conforming situation. Clauson said there was a periphery area that bumps out on older part of structure that was non- conforming onto the newly created lot line. He said this area (described on the plat) that bumps was 7.7 feet by 2.6 feet, this was the historic extension of the foundation. Clauson said the only way to amend the non-conformity was to remove it and that would cause impertinence to the structure. He provided the 1904 Sanborne Map, which illustrated the original condition of the house on the west elevation bump-out. He said that it was Nolan’s intention to remove the impertinence and create the appropriate conditions for development on the lots, to build their own home on Lot #1. He said the west elevation would be restored to the historic façade. Whether or not it would be on the historic register was under consideration; it was once on the register and taken off in the 1980’s because of all of the additions. He said that because of the historical nature, it was now under consideration for placing it back on the register. Rick Head asked if HPC could administratively grant variances like these. Sara Thomas, City Zoning Officer, replied that only on the Landmark Property. Clauson stated that the 2.4 feet was needed to remain with the building and the original lot line. He said that HPC commented favorably on the variance. Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer, said HPC recommended that it be granted so that no more of it would be demolished. MOTION: Rick Head moved to approve the variance in Case #99-5, for a 2.4 foot by 7.7 foot side yard setback to allow the existing structure at 308 North First Street retain the historic footprint, finding the review standards have been met. David Schott second. Roll call vote : DeLuca, Yes; Head, yes; Schott, yes; Iglehart, yes; Paterson, yes. APPROVED 5- 0. 3 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 17, 1999 MINUTES th MOTION: Rick Head moved to approve the May 13 minutes. Howard DeLuca second. ALL IN FAVOR. APPROVED 5-0. Adjourned 4:35 Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk CASE #99-04 SCHRAMM, 0105 PTIKIN MESA DRIVE ................................ ................................ ................ 1 CASE #99-05 NOLAN, 308 NORTH FIRST STREET ................................ ................................ ..................... 3 MINUTES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 4 4