HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19990708CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JULY 8, 1999
Rick Head opened the special City of Aspen Board of Adjustment meeting at 4:10
p.m. Board members Howard DeLuca, Rick Head, David Schott, Jim Iglehart, Bill
Murphy and Charles Paterson were present. Staff in attendance: David Hoefer,
Assistant City Attorney; Sarah Oates and Sara Thomas, City Zoning Officer; Jackie
Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CASE #99-06 HY-WEST CONDOMINIUMS 835 EAST HYMAN
Rick Head opened the public hearing for Hy-West Condominiums. Martin Davis
and Cheryl Schmidt represented the Hy-West Condominiums. David Hoefer,
Assistant City Attorney, stated for the record the notice and affidavit of mailing was
provided. Ms. Schmidt stated the reason for the variances was to help bring the
building closer to compliance with the current code. There was a problem with
parking if the stairwell was placed on the rear of the building so a smaller stairwell
was designed. Ms. Schmidt said that the Parks Department required tree
replacement on the Hyman Street side of the building.
There were no public comments.
MOTION: David Schott moved to approve the six foot (6’) side yard
setback variance to allow for construction of an exterior stairwell at 835
East Hyman, City of Aspen, finding that the review standards have been
met. Jim Iglehart second. Roll call vote: DeLuca, yes; Schott, yes;
Iglehart, yes; Head, yes; Paterson, yes. APPROVED 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CASE #99-07 FARR RESIDENCE, 998 GIBSON AVENUE
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.
Jeff Dickinson represented the applicants, Bill and Tena Farr and Bil Dunaway.
Sven Alstrom was the architect on the project. Dickinson provided photos of the
small panabode duplex. Each unit was about 607 square feet and the proposal was
to add 816 square feet to the west half in order to make the unit more livable. It
would provide for a living area, ½ bath and master bedroom upstairs. The design
1
CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JULY 8, 1999
had the least impact on the existing vegetation and views. It was a tight lot and the
combined front and rear yard setback was 30 feet.
Bil Dunaway stated that ½ of the duplex was leased to employees of the Aspen
Times and the other owned by his daughter. The parking was indicated on a
blueline.
Sven Alstrom stated this was an existing non-conformity and the combined setbacks
posed a problem with the triangles created. He said that almost any additions would
require variances.
Lois Vaugner, public, stated that she did not object to adding more room to the
duplex but wanted to make the board aware of water problems in the area. She
stated concern for parking and hoped to see the plans before construction began.
Howard DeLuca asked the allowable FAR and stated concern for the building being
further renovated at a later date. Sara Thomas replied that this was 3871 and it was
currently at 1218 square feet. Dickinson responded that the proposal was for the
building at 2013 square feet total. Dunaway stated that he wanted to keep the rents
low and chose to remodel and add on instead of tearing down and rebuilding.
Rick Head asked if the applicant researched adding square footage and staying
within the setbacks. Dickinson replied that was the red lined area on the drawings
but it was not investigated thouroughly. Head said that he applauded the applicant
for the employee housing aspect but the board could not consider that as part of the
issue because that could always be changed in the future. Head stated that the entire
building was under the same ownership. He said that by granting this variance it
would grant special privileges and the board could not do that.
Jim Iglehart stated that there were ways that an addition could work without
variances; it would cost more money but this board could not use monetary issues as
part of the review process.
Charles Paterson noted difficulty in considering a minimum variance. He said there
wasn’t a practical difficulty.
Dickinson said the passive solar gains and preservation of the views made sense and
asked if the board could consider those portions as negotiations to accomplish the
variances. Paterson responded that if the solar gain could be accomplished by
2
CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JULY 8, 1999
another plan, that would be the way to grant some variance but these were above the
norm.
Dunaway said that he could build the addition but a lot of trees would have to be
removed. Trees could be cut but there was mitigation that would have to be done.
Thomas stated that procedurally, the variances would have to be denied and then
resubmitted under a new application. Hoefer stated that the reasons for denial were
valid.
Thomas noted that the zoning map was incorrect, it was actually R15A, but it only
changed the setback requirements to 25 feet instead of 30 feet, which was more
constraining.
MOTION: Rick Head moved to deny Case #99-07, the 5 foot front yard,
rear yard and 19 foot combined front and rear yard setback variance to
allow expansion of a non-conforming duplex structure located at 998
Gibson Avenue finding the review standards have not been met. David
Schott second. Roll call vote : DeLuca, yes; Head, yes; Schott, yes;
Iglehart, yes; Paterson, yes. DENIED 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CASE #99-08 RYMER, 824 EAST COOPER
Charles Paterson opened the public hearing for Case #99-08 for the Rymer
residence, 824 East Cooper Avenue requesting a 10-foot rear yard setback for the
construction of a garage. David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, stated that affidavit
was provided and met the requirements for the board to proceed.
Paterson read the dimensional requirements of a front yard setback at 10 feet; rear
yard at 10 feet; side yard at 5 feet; open space at 35% and height at 25 feet. The
property was listed on the historic inventory but was not land marked.
Kenneth Moore, representative for Pat Rymer, stated that he had the original set of
plans and provided the history of the house and remodeling.
Rick Head asked the existing square footage. Moore replied the house was 3522
square feet, which included the basement and old garage. Head noted the lot was
only 3000 square feet. Moore said that without the current garage it would be 3118
3
CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JULY 8, 1999
square feet. Head said that there was no hardship. Sara Thomas stated that if the
variance was granted, HPC would still have to review these plans.
Paterson read letters from Terry Sparling, 810 East Cooper, and Herb Freiberg.
Susan Bailey, public and next-door neighbor, stated objection to the garage structure
being built and it was non-conforming.
Wes Anson, public, stated that Pat was a wonderful neighbor but he felt strongly
that this house was already too large for the lot. He noted this would add to the
monolithic existing structure. He said there were 4 trees in their backyard and they
received the only light available.
Howard DeLuca noted the house was already maximized and there was no hardship
for a variance. The need for a garage was not a just cause for a variance.
MOTION: Rick Head moved to deny the 10-foot rear yard setback
variance to allow for construction of an attached garage located 824 East
Cooper finding the review standards have not been met. David Schott
second. Roll call vote : DeLuca, yes; Head, yes; Schott, yes; Iglehart,
yes; Paterson, yes. DENIED 5-0.
MINUTES
MOTION: Rick Head moved to approve the June 17th minutes at the
next Board of adjustment meeting. Howard DeLuca second. ALL IN
FAVOR. APPROVED 5-0.
Adjourned 5:35
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
CASE #99-06 HY-WEST CONDOMINIUMS 835 EAST HYMAN ................................ ................................ ... 1
CASE #99-07 FARR RESIDENCE, 998 GIBSON AVENUE ................................ ................................ ............. 1
4
CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JULY 8, 1999
CASE #99-08 RYMER, 824 EAST COOPER ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 3
MINUTES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 4
5