HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.111W-Hyman.012-96
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DECEMBER 12, 1996
Charlie Paterson, Chairman, opened the special meeting at 4:05 p.m. Jim Iglehart,
Ron Erickson, Rick Head and David Schott were present. Dan Martineau and
Howard DeLuca were absent.
MINUTES
Charlie Paterson asked if there were any corrections or deletions for the minutes
on the continued public hearing case #96-11 from the December 12, 1996
meeting. He asked for a correction on page #3 from pannaboat to panabode.
MOTION: David Schott moved to accept the minutes from December
12,1996. Jim Iglehart seconded. ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION PASSED.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CASE #96-12 WILLIAM D. SNARE 111 WEST HYMAN
Charlie Paterson opened the variance hearing noting the changes on the NOTICE
OF PUBLIC HEARING with the corrections of the height variance from 8 feet to
3 feet and 33 feet to 28 feet. William Snare was represented by William Griffith,
Attorney. Paterson read from the application: The GMQS approved the plans and
building in Ordinance 5, by the City Council, in 1993. At that time the height of
the proposed building was 33 feet. Present restrictions on height are a maximum
of 2 5 feet.
This project completes 4 duplex apartments on the subject property. For
uniformity in appearance, all should be the same height.
Therefore, the applicant requests a variance to permit the original height of 33
feet to the ridge.
David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, asked for Proof of Notice. Griffith sta~ed
that the notice had been posted from November 21st until December 12th and
supplied two photos. He said that 120 property owners were sent copies of the
notice on November 13th with the list attached. Hoefer stated the affidavits
presented were in order and the board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Griffith noted that Mr. Snare was out of state and could not be present. Mr. Snare
has owned this property for about forty years and up to about twenty years ago
had a house on that property. Griffith said that three years ago they received PUC
approval for this project but the plans were not approved. He said that the plans
1
..,
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DECEMBER 12.1996
went to all the departments and there were changes made. He was not sure when
the height change happened. This completes the project and showed the duplex
with two units and the third unit along with the proposal for the fourth unit. He
said if this was not approved, the fourth unit would not be a mirror image but
about 3 feet lower.
Griffith said that two people were in favor of the project and two were opposed.
He said the error of 8 foot instead of 3 foot might have made a difference in the
objections. Ron Erickson read the Elizabeth G. Traggis and Ray Koenig into the
record regarding the negative impacts of this project and request the variance be
denied. Paterson read into the record the Will F. Nicholson letter supporting the
project.
Mickey Heron, Public, represents the owner of the half of the duplex next door
who does not support the application. He said there was a question of symmetry
to be taken into account. Heron asked that there be very strict restrictions if the
variance was granted.
Paterson asked the Board members for questions. Jim Iglehart and Rick Head had
no questions. Erickson asked why in 1993 this half of the duplex was not built.
He said now the code was changed. Griffith thought money may have been the
problem in 1993. Sara Thomas, Staff, answered that they received an allotment
from the Growth Management System in 1993, up to that point, that was what was
needed to obtain approval to build in that space. According to what was granted at
that time, there were 3 years vested for that Growth Management allotment with
the deed restricted Affordable Housing Unit. She said the vested interest expired
in January but they received their permit prior to that so the permitting process had
been extended. The plans were not vested or part of the review process that went
through zoning. She said if the plans had been approved three years ago the
height would also have been a problem at that time.
Paterson asked Thomas to read into the record her memo. Hoefer stated the copy
of the Community Development Memorandum was part of the record.
Head agreed with the Community Development Memo especially staff response:
that a structure could be designed in a manner that still blends with the
neighboring buildings, yet coriforms with the existing height limit of 25 feet.
2
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DECEMBER 12, 1996
Head further agreed with the structure could be designed and built at the required
height limit, without requiring a variance at all. He said that he would deny the
variance and would move to do so.
David Schott felt the same way Rick did after looking at the site and could not see
the practical difficulty for granting this variance. He said that 3 feet may not seem
like much, but the rule was a 25 foot height limitation.
Erickson commented that there should not be a problem designing a building that
conforms.
Iglehart said there was no practical difficulty or hardship in this situation. He
thought it could be built if it were re-designed to still look nice.
Paterson stated that it was up to the applicant that there be a practical difficulty
and a hardship in this case. He said that was what the Board had to consider. He
noted the Board could not consider the economics or the design problems unless
the applicant can show complete hardship.
Erickson asked if it was easier (as a point of order) to recommend approval of the
variance and turn it down or ask for denial. Hoefer stated that either way was fine,
it was up to the Board.
Griffith said that 3 feet was such a small variance and would not block anyone's
view. He said that with the other 3 buildings already in there this one will be
shorter. He said all the building plans will have to be redone.
Paterson said the only thing to consider is that if this had been built originally for
the plans, he would have had every right to do so. He said the Board might
consider the ownership for all those years and the hardship was that the zoning
changed. Erickson commented that the land use code is a living document that is
continually changing and that is what brings most of the people in front of this
Board. He said the applicant is at fault here, because he had the opportunity to
build this duplex three years ago before the code changed. Hoefer said the j
applicant did not receive vested rights for the development plan. Hoefer said the
J
Ordinance did not reference the building plan. Griffith said City Council
approved and suggested if the referral statements were complied with, then would
gain approval. Thomas said that the approvals given by GMQS are never on
3
"
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DECEMBER 12,1996
specific plans, and the specific plans were never submitted for building permits.
Thomas stated that even 3 years ago the height restriction would have applied.
Head noted that had he received the GMQS approval, he still could not have built
from those plans. Thomas stated all he received was approval to build a structure.
Paterson said it was like half a roof was built and now the other half cannot be
built to it. Erickson commented the duplexes were different colors and could not
see any continuity at all with the structures.
MOTION: Rick Head moved to deny the request for a three foot height
variance to allow for construction of a structure with a height of twenty
eight feet at 111 West Hyman Avenue, finding that the review standards
have not been met. Jim Iglehart seconded. Head, Schott and Iglehart
voted to deny the variance request. Paterson and Erickson voted to
approve the variance request. The denial did not pass in this motion.
MOTION: Rick Head moved to approve the request for a three foot
height variance to allow for construction of a structure with a height of
twenty eight feet at 111 West Hyman Avenue. Erickson seconded.
Iglehart, Head, Erickson and Schott voted against approval of the
variance and Paterson voted for approval. VARIANCE DENIED 4-1.
Meeting adjourned.
>tb~It<:~(j()%t]tU2.~
/jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
v
4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CASE #96-12
Before the City of Aspen Board of Adjustment
TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR USE V ARlANCE
DESCRIBED BELOW:
Pursuaot to the Official Code of Aspen of June 25, 1962, as amended, a public hearing will be held in the
BASEMENT MEETING ROOM, City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, (or at such other place as the meeting may
be then adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority
for variance from the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 26, Official Code of Aspen. All persons
affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you
cannot appear personally at such meeting, you are urged to state your views by letter, particularly if you
have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious consideration to the opinions
of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for
vanance.
Particulars of the hearing and requested variance are as follows:
Date and Time of Meeting:
Date: December 12, 1996, City Council Meeting Room
Time: 4:00 P.M.
Owner for Variance:
Applicant for Variance:
Name: William D. Snare
William D. Snare
(represented by William M. Griffith)
Address: 300 Clermont St., Denver, Co 80220
Location or description of property:
111 West Hyman, Aspen Co 81611
Variances Requested: Applicant is requesting a height variance of 3 feet to allow for
construction of a duplex with a height of 28 feet, so that it will conform with the three existing
duplexes located on the parcel.
Will applicant be represented by Counsel: YES: X NO:
The City of Aspen Board of Adjustment
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Charles Paterson, Chairman
-,
CITY OF ASPEN
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DEVELOPMEl'IT APPUCATION
DATE Oct. 18
19~
CASE # Bldg. pennit #6-3
APPUCANT William D. Snare
PHONE (303) 355-8022
MAILING ADDRESS 300 Clerrront St. , Denver, Colorado 80220
OWNER William D. Snare
PHONE (303) 355-8022
MAILING ADDRESS SaJre
LOCATION OF PROPERTY 111 w. Hyman Street, Aspen, Colorado
(Streer, Block Number and Lot Number)
W1LL YOU BE REPRESENTED BY COUNCll.? YESx.. NO_
Below, describe clearly the proposed variance, including all dimensions and justification for the
variance. (Additional paper may be used if necessary.) The building permit application and any
other information you feel is pertinent should accompany this application, and will be made part of
this case.
The GMQS approved the plans and building in Ordinance 5, by the City Council,
in 1993. At that time the height of the proposed building was 33 feet. Present;
restrictions on height are a maximum of 25 feet.
This project c~letes 4 duplex apart:rrents on the subject and adjacent
property. For uniformity in appearance, all should be the SaJre height.
Therefore, the applicant requests a variance to permit the original height
of 33 feet.
Applicant's Signature _~ ~ XAA.D.~ \;\. QMfl _ 0
. William D. Snare -
REASONS FOR DENIAL OF BUILDING PERlVIIT, BASED ON THE ASPEN CITY
CODE, CHAPTER 24. AN OPINION CONCERNING THIS VARIANCE WILL BE
PRESENTED TO THE BOARD BY THE ZONING DEPARTMENT STAFF.
DATE PERMIT DENIED
OFFICIAL
DATE OF APPUCATION
HEARING DATE
,...',
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Board of Adjustment
;?
Stan Clauson, Community Development Directlf
THRU:
FROM:
Sara Thomas, Zoning Officer
RE:
111 W. Hyman Street - William Snare
DATE:
December 3, 1996
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The applicant requests a variance from the required height limit of
25 feet in order to complete a duplex project, located at 111 W. Hyman Avenue.
The property is located in the R-MF zone district. The height of the existing
structure is 28 feet, as measured to the mid-point of the roof, with a ridge height
of 33 feet. The applicant is requesting a 3 foot height variance in order to
conform with the height of the existing structure. The proposed building plans
are In conformance with FAR requirements and with setback requirements.
The applicant was granted an allocation from the Growth Management Quota
System (GMQS) in January, 1993 for one free market unit and a GMQS
exemption for one deed restricted unit.(See attached Ordinance No.5). The
growth management process granted a development order, but was not a review
of building plans and therefore did not grant approval to any specific designs or
drawings.
Please refer to the attached drawings and written information provided by the
applicant for a complete presentation of the proposed variance.
APPLICANT:
William D. Snare, represented by William Griffith
LOCATION:
111 W. Hyman Avenue
REVIEW STANDARDS AND STAFF EVALUATION: Pursuant to Section
26.108.040 of the Municipal Code, in order to authorize a variance from the
dimensional requirements of Title 26, the board of adjustment shall make a
finding that the following three (3) circumstances exist:
1. Standard: The grant of the variance will be generally consistent with the
purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan and this title.
,....
Response: While a stated goal of the Aspen Area Comprehensive
Plan is to promote buildings which maintain neighborhood
compatibility, staff feels that a structure could be designed in a
manner that still blends with the neighboring buildings, yet
conforms with the existing height limit of 25 feet.
2. Standard: The grant of the variance is the minimum variance that will
make possible the reasonable use of the parcel, building, or structure.
Response: The structure could be designed and built at the required
height limit, without requiring a variance at all.
3. Standard: Literal interpretation and enforcement of the terms and
provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly
enjoyed by other parcels in the same zone district, and would cause the
applicant unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty. In determining
whether an applicant's right would be deprived, the board shall consider
whether either of the following conditions apply:
a. There are special conditions and circumstances which are unique to
the parcel, building or structure, which are not applicable to other parcels,
structures or buildings in the same zone district and which do not result
from the actions of the applicant; or
b. Granting the variance will not confer upon the applicant any special
privilege denied by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan the terms of this
title to other parcels, buildings or structures, in the same zone district.
Response: The proposed building does have a special condition of
trying to complete the remaining half of an existing structure and to
attempt to duplicate that structure as closely as possible in order to
maintain the design of the duplex. However, staff feels that granting
this variance would confer a special privilege upon the applicant in
that all other new construction in the same zone district would have
to comply with current height requirements. As stated above, staff
feels that the issue of compatibility with the neighboring structures
can be remedied in the design stage, and that a structure could be
designed so that it conforms with both the neighboring buildings
and with the current height requirements.
AL TERNA TIVES: The Board of Adjustment may consider any of the following
alternatives:
- ~
. Approve the variance as requested.
Approve the variance with conditions.
. Table action to request further information be provided by the applicant or
interested parties.
. Deny the variance finding that the review standards are not met.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the three foot height
variance request.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to deny the request for a three foot height
variance to allow for construction of a structure with a height of twenty eight feet
at 111 W. Hyman Avenue, finding that the review standards are not met."
.'"
)
I
ORDINANCE NO. 5
(SERIES OF 1993)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN GRANTING A
RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATION FOR ONE FREE MARKET UNIT
AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR ONE DEED RESTRICTED UNIT LOCATED AT III W.
HYMAN AVENUE (LOT G AND 1/2 OF LOT F, BLOCK 61/ TOWNSITE OF ASPEN)
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 24, Article 8 of the Aspen
Municipal Code, the City Council may grant allocations from the
Growth Management quotas contained therein upon scoring determined
by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission; and
WHEREAS/ pursuant to section 24-8-104 C.l.c. of the Aspen
Municipal Code, the City Council may exempt deed restricted
affordable housing units from the Growth Management Quota System
(GMQS) competition; and
WHEREAS, William D. Snare, owner, submitted to the Planning
Office an application for a Growth Management allotment for one
unit and GMQS Exemption for one affordable housing unit; and
WHEREAS, the III W. Hyman Avenue proposal was the only
submission competing for the six available units (as established
as a minimum by section 24-8-103.F.l. of the Aspen Municipal Code) i
and
WHEREAS,
the application was reviewed by the Engineering
Department, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office, Environmental
Health Department, Fire Marshal, Water Department, Electrical
Department, and the Roaring Fork Energy Center and those agencies
submitted referral comments to the Planning Office; and
\
I
)
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on January 5, 1993 the
1
-'"
)
Aspen Planning and Zoning commission scored the proposal pursuant
to the standards contained in Section 24-8-106.E. and found that
the Commission' s score of 33.65 points met or exceeded minimum
scoring thresholds; and
WHEREAS, the Commission also voted 6-0 to approve with
conditions the proposed deed restricted one-bedroom unit pursuant
to the review criteria for GMQS Exemption within Section 24-8-
104.C.l.c.; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council having considered the proposal
and the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, does wish
to allocate one free market unit from the 1992 Residential Growth
Management competition and grant GMQS Exemption for Affordable
Housing for one Category 1 deed restricted unit at 111 W. Hyman
) Avenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
section 1: That it does hereby allocate one residential unit from
the 1992 Residential Growth Management competition to the 111 W.
Hyman Avenue project pursuant to Section 24, Article 8 of the Aspen
Municipal Code.
Section 2:
That, subject to the conditions set forth in Section
3 below, it does hereby grant GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing
for the development of one Category 1 deed restricted one ~edroom
unit pursUant to section 24-8-104.C.l.c. of the Aspen Municipal
I
Code.
Section 3.
)
2
-- ,
The conditions of approval which apply to this GMQS Exemption
are:
1. The owner shall submit the appropriate deed restriction to
the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for approval.
Upon
approval by the Housing Office, the Owner shall record the
deed restriction with the pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's
Office.
2. Prior to issuance of any building permits for the property,
copies of the recorded deed restriction for the dwelling unit
must be forwarded to the Planning Office.
3. The final design must incorporate a roof/dormer above the
entry to the deed restricted housing unit to shed snow away
from the doorway.
)
4 .
If condominiumized, the unit's annual management/maintenance
assessments shall be on a pro rata valuation basis. Language
to this effect shall be in the condominium documents and shall
be approved by the Housing Office prior to recordation.
5. All material representations made by the applicant in the
application and during public meetings with the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council shall be adhered to and
considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended
by other conditions.
section 4:
)
A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the -2<<
I
day of4e.Lud2J({'" 1993 at 5:00 P.M. in the city Council Chambers,
Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which
3
-".'.,
a hearing of public notice of the same shall be published In a
)
newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
section 5:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or
portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
section 6:
This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and
shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now
pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended
as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded
\ under such prior ordinances.
)
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
as provided by
the ~5~
law, by
the City Council of the City of Aspen on
day of
~~
(/
, 1993.
1e~n~le~?~-Yo:OTZ
1\;:'~T:,
/i/ /, " 1/ '
~~--[L--::;'P( /....._l
Kathryn s.
approved this ~~ day
~l f Rr- FVvL
~ohn Bennett, Mayor
I
of
FINALLY, adopted, passed and
;;;;...~, 1993.
)
4
.....
, ,
WILLIAM M. GRIFFITH
ATTORNJi;Y AT LAW
1660 LINCOLN STREET, SUITE 2202
DENVER,COLORADO
80264
TELEPHONE (303)861-7055/ FAX (303)861-7056
October 23, 1996
Community Development
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611-1975
Attn:
Sara Thomas
OCT 28 1996
Re: william D. Snare
Board of Adjustment
Dear Sara:
Enclosed is an original and nine cbpies of Mr. Snare's application
to the Board of Adjustment for a variance, together with Mr. Snare's
check for $105 payable to the Aspen City Clerk.
Also enclosed are nine copies of the site plan, elevators and the
original Hyman Street Duplex Subdivision which shows the other three
units and the subject unit to complete the project.
I have received from the County Assessor a list of the property owners
within a 300 ft. radius of the property together with mailing labels.
When I get the notice from the City Clerk, I will mail out the proper
Notice. For some reason, which I don't understand, there is a label
for the City of Aspen and Pitkin County. I suppose this will require
the longer posting period.
If you have any questions, or if I left out something, please give
me a call.
Very truly yours,
c
~:::~
WMG/cm
enclosures
"'"'"
.PAY TO THE
" ORDER OF
(1)
WILLIAM D. SNARE
MARGARET W. SNARE
300 CLERMONT ST.
~ DENVER, C , " 20
~ c..t!lilJIIICAL
""'VAn...NI(ING
~70"""" "'''ENUE
MEM01~ ~W~~'7
~
d:O 2 ~OOO ~ 2BI: ~ ~Bcmb3B 5 ~ ?b.s,,'
r
.
"
@,' f{> &--.1 ,
, .
.,
\.QJ j~",'
21.02
2402
~189
19:fL 210
$ /05;00_
DOLLARS
~ ,~l^<T' Go-'"
.
...m-''''N.
"""
f47 Peauot AvenUE
New London, CT rf3?O
City of AsnEn Board of Adjustment
130 S. Galena Street
ASDen, CO 81fn
Re: Case /!Qf-12
Dear ~oard memhers:
I "rish to re~<.ster mv stro'l" o"jection to the annJi.cation suhmitted by 'oJilliAm D.
Snare (rF'Drpsentf'rl ny l.J':"lJ-iam !'ft. Grir.t";+:n1 f'()~ R v~r-i~r:cf'- O~ rrrrcF-'rtv at 1]1 W. Hyman.
I submit to vou that "rantinE' an (l.' vAriAncf' so t.hat the aDpl1cant can "conform with
the three f'xi stin" dunlf'xPs locah.d on the narcel" is defini telv NOT a l"'f'i timate
reason t'or doir~ so. It's time to ston the insidious attack on zonine' r""ulatio!'1s in
rf'S i dential nei"hborhoods i.!'1 Aspen. The existence of three dup'.exes not confor1!1i Of'
with zoni!'1e' ref'ulations certainly does not translate into a reasonable excuse to
create a fourth such structure. Three wrongs do not make a right! .Th1s' l'if'-lg-hhorhccd -
or any other for that matter - should not be reduced to homof'eneous st.ructures for
the convf'nience of a builder/ow~f'r.
If vou will e'0 back in ti1!1e to when Cottonwoods was built (124 W. HY'"an) all three
floors were in nlace before a heie'ht discrenancy was challenp'ed and the builder was
reauired to have each floor nhysically lifted-one foot was cut off between each floor
to bring the buildinf' under com"l i AnCE' with zonine' ref'ulati ons. I ask you now for the
same ri"id enforcement of zonin" ref'ulations - please do NOT e'rant this variance.
It's time the zoni.nf' re"ulations were enforced as .<rittcn and not treated as a joke
by t'eonla who nnd creative wavs or "reaso!'1s" to justify bend in" the law. Incidentall~
it's interestin" to note that the builder of the three existinp' dunlexes on the ""arcf':
i!'1 auestion was also the "uilder of Cottonwoods some years earlier.
Please examine city records - Vou .Nill find th.t a permit for further development ot'
the land in auestion "as denied a number of vears a"o - on more "rounds than just
hei"ht alone. Arnone' other thi n"s ,thf! FAR would he well over the Allowable limit for
the ut'arcel" in Question. It WAS deemed wron!! then - .::lnd it is wron!! no~""'. This bu4Jdi~
would nresent a solid wall of housinl' "rith hardly a ol.de of f'rass or dece of sky to
be seen. Has anyone checked the FAR of this aPDlication???
It is hardlv acci dental that this hpari np' is set. for the off -season when I t'ersonally
k!'1oW that several of the neonle most. a~~ected are !'1ot onlV out of town "ut are out of
the country-completely unaware of this development and therefor unable to respond.
Orr-season seems to be ooen seaSon for zoning variance reauests. I'm sure you know
that there's a sayinp' in Asnen that "if you wait lon!,: €!'1ou"h you can p'et ,^'hatevf'r you
r.:rant throu~h zonine-'" _ T lyme that thi s is not Q"oin2' to 'Je the resuJ.t in thi.s case.
This nei"hborhood h.s been imnacted pnou"h - " permit for a similar huildinp' at this
location on this "narcel" of land was rip'htfully denied by responsible zoninu boc\< thE'!
I submit that it was a ,^Qse decis<on then and reauest that the nresent Poard adhf'rf' to
the orip'inal decision.
I si!'1cerelv re"ret that I am unable to be nresent personally t.o suomi t my ver.v st.ronl'
objection. but hODf' thet the Dresent zoni nl' boa rd .ri 11 considET this reauest in a
thouf"htful, resDonsible manner. As a lonft time ASPE'nite, I can only hODE' for fairness
Que1itV of lit'e in Ast'en has certainly chan"ed in recent years. as it >'as in many D10Cf
but Aspen has always bee!'1 a very sDecial t'lace. It is up t.o those who choose t.o make
it their home to take a stand a~ainst nrojf!cts that ~re clearly not in the bFst interF'
of the community and to take responsibility for seein" that everyones ril'hts are
crotected. Please help to protect the inte"rity of our nf!i~hborhood b~E'nyinf' this
vAr<ance. ~. ~ Si!'1cerely VO.'J:1.tth&:1/4'V .
~I 1Z\i zabetff:j Tral'l'is ~r
fl:1yn)ond J. Koeni!',
-~6ttonwoods -2F 124 W. Hyman
:"""
t} "~:'" .~' . - .
"
"
.... :
:j-
,
"
f
,;
,
!
,
:!
..
r.~i"l~
IU~IU~~ ~
\ It ;t"
\l~ \ ~ l
'i~...' ~ 'I
! l~~\if\i
'lla~,~:
I J", I
Ii: '
i, \
~
'"
'I
\:'
, ~
,
. '~'... jDIl:l'...o
MM tQ .'
, .
I
Ii
.
~
!I
-.
.
_10"
:L
,;!
j
..............
..... ,_. . '. -.'
j.. .
' ...
~'Z
It
.' ~~.
~
1\(\
t
~
"
, ,. _.-~,. _.
. I
I
...
--
"rrl~~ ~ ~ tl~:t ~~I~I'\'r.,1
"1"~~
.. '\ ~ ~ d
lHE!H1~~:1~-
Iljhllhfl
H. ~q ~
II I i ~ i t ~ ~I U
".
. .~\:~~~~:~
.... i\j.~
'~( "":i
'.: !""A
,~ ." '~
... 'if
"'"..'''
. ..
"
. ~'-',;
-'-"'-.'
.'.i
.' .':~
J
.,
. ":l
.
,....:a
, . ~1
. .
'.' t.e
';~" ~
, .,
';1-<...
t',. .J
. I';
,
" ,
, ,
"
. .: ....
1
. .,
~.'-..
-,-
....
--- .. ,\.1; ~ll! '
-( )
/ ~:r~lll~ . iii
.. r ! ~~I Q~
/ ~'I
.~., Ul ~
/
-----I
j--., "0
.. / ,
...~- .>
/ r-
- / r-
,..,
---! -<
/
"40_ /
/ ;:r
/ ....
:]
-----! .>
/ ~~
~
OJ ~
/ r-
.~! 0 J . ~,.,
/ C\ ~.>
i" ~ -,....
/ Il' ~
-----I - c::
,.."
/
[, /
I
---~
;':
l ri~ ~i
L ~~I QIQ
~ S ~!q
t'I ~ I... :z
~lF~8
.~ ~ 15
~.~ k. ~ ~.~
~~_.t;;;- ~
~(~. r~' ~~
~r"i' ~
'~ ~
~R~PQQ~ Q
IS;~be"1 ~
~l~~~i~i. :;;
. . gl~i~8!1 E
f~~~lli t'l
UIl;' U!i~~;!! ~
t.:~'< I(!~~~f' ~
R Ii:' .i'~~.a t'l
2 if . ~~~~h
~ it' ~~ h~~
! '. '~I~!
· W. !l Il!e~ ~ ! ~~.q~ ~~
l'ln., . ~i i~lia~~
~W.l! -Ii !l ~.:!~i~ ii
tlIW... !..' i~n q~s
i ~ I ';. ~ d!l!l- 9i' ,~
N~' I ". i:l~'!
. " . ~ >
_ I:' I
I 1,:; ~ ,
._ . I' I I
,~ .
.'-~
~.~ ~,
.' ."1
.;.:~,4;;-.-;-r~: ~~:-,....' .... ": ..~~:
., ~...' ~...-...-..".;
:W'! ~c:"l
. Cl~
t.l ~ Ol'l
~p~ ~~
~~
flti~
1\ ~l~
l Ii r' 6
gu~ gj~~ ie~
,; ~I~ 'li~1
$1u ~.. '.~l'l
r ! ~ t, 'I~ If ~ S
2 ~,~~ I' ~ ~ ~
. Ii ~. ~ ~o
~~
\
\
ifl ~~ ~
ill ~~ ~
; t..;
~
! Q; 81 ~ ~
~.l~-~~ ~ ~
. I-I~~lt
~ ~ ~ -:
~ ~ E
~
8
~
t'i4' .
t'1j :.-~
><.
~i~i ~~ ~ i ~I~ ~
~Ni ~e h ~II ~
~Jlio ~a ; ~ li
111~~9 i 'J ~..
I~ ~-1~&1 f~ .
.~. !~~q S[:;lli' ~
t~ I~I~~" r q
10 ~}~ '! it
::::,.,q. I ~
III ~ti ~i r.1~i
"l~i~ I~~ ~i!:l ~. Il~~
I~ ~I :1 I' . ~~
,~. .g &1i~', 1.1 . i~
_ ;j !ei e ~
I 'e . · ~I
"~L Pi. '.
. ..~' .;,.' .. ,...... "'.' '..,~: ,,: .......' .' ,.' ,...:,,,-"':' ,
....;..:-.~.._, ~-~,'~~~.~.,l.;r.,:"'71"-ll;:- ,.. ~.' .~..,,-.t;'.-":-lF-(..i.:.
:' _'. - ~ -~.:_. ',' :;(::; ..~!__~-.<:.:.: ; i. .,I:~,.~.,!.. ....._ _ .~,._ t;.:~~ 1;~~-J: _.:-'
._ _: _~_. ..."'....:lIfS:.:............"'~,:~.;:.. '{-.;'-- .10:-.:..;.... ~..~,,~r.~~
".1- _' .....,_ _..~ __.:,-i<:,.~~,... :,.:'""'" .........~ ~"'~ 'p. '~ii ~''f111Jij:tt'~ ':ii .w'i'i'" L "';}[iWif'
1; .
i..
.....;.'f
'..
j
.'
I
I
II
II
r=
II .
F=-
I..'
I
t::
L!! I
t~~J~~~tJ
1'1 J
~ : !
~. 11
1 I
In dT
..i....
,
_..~,_..-~
'.
1i
@
i'i
q)
"
,-.--., ----..
-
I'
-,----
-_.~_. ---
,
;'!:I
'.
i.
~~
.1
l~
I1==
:.:.:.111.1'
;'"
I' I,
~. I:
\
\,
r
~
oj
\.)
L
rr-,
I I
II
'I
I.
I
I
Ii
il
\1
il
"
I:
,
. ""'..
!
[ ~
.,~'-
.( i\i1
-"'-..,.............,...,.
i __~~...
l~
1.,e,.'.;J ..
rlr-:--l r'
; ",:J~~;"J [-';:~"T~;~~~
",,";'/:,"":
'.'., \';.ill, ._;;...,.,',:....1',
. . ; ~ d I I ! : " : ': : . ! :I ,..; <: : : : : ' i;:: ;, ' . . . .
<(1 'i' =."':",=, 'E' :tf! I .
~ . -'~~ . .~=. (/ :
- I '
u I
I
,
I,
I!
Ii
II
L=-:i
.~
0,
,
I
I
,
pr
Ii!
\ I
t J
.u.--'
(
t ..
\
P
.
,
I
.
,
I
,
.
<
I
I
,I
~._-::~:'~__. -::~-,~.,.+":""::', .....:_L
, .--~-...I.... ,
i -~-...-.-_..~--:1~-.....- -~i';,
, ,.. .'... ',.-~:-...,,;;---; '-- :\-<;- t:.~:.:--
l
" : : ':i":: '_\;:.-':. ~::::':;{1.>r~;':-~.::<-:,,-.1->:~,;3:~~
.....'(',:{i0'i.~,,~'f~~1..,...~!..'.}.:.";-: ")~
'-". .~:~::v
".' ,
.' .
;.;,;
l
~.
t II
! 1
, '
1 .,
J
...
-"
-
,
q~! i I
J1 'i II
i I I
'1
.t~j [I::~r.:t'_cj" 1~7'fje~~~ aJ
I
I :f'
., .
, .1
I'
:\,..
.'
'1-~l' ~~.'r.~~:,f1~:;~k. J~:.,:-.~n.~-~.$~t ~.~~~:.',J} f~PS.;.:f1;-ft.~;~.~.~. ~;,~..;~~~t_ ".1' ",,'1" .;t
~it.'~~:;::ol1~ -!""'~.1.i!.~..~t"':"'}!'!f l;~J:f.~t~..,J:.~ r.~.'I,;.. ..t~. I....:.: .~;.~. jo' ,', ,.~. '.''It
,"'!_~. /." '1Ii".,.. ~ tp1 r. . ~ "l" , . ". ' '!I' t' ~ . ...........:\',.~.;i
, ,. "'. of I ',' ":'-.:..\t-':J;.:~"~'I . .:.' .~: ' '...., i."
t {"t ':. t. ~';...ot /0", II' .10 ' . } . . ,- . - ~
'; ;', t, ., . I " ". (:; : ~.'.'~ j ,.~:': '. '.' . - .
-, !
<," ' ...
"";
r
o
J
\ I
\~
J
I
t
'\ ~
'-I
"11"
1:11' ili
,ll'i;i. ,Iqi
""1'1 '1,
ii:;!I..:I:!!1
;1'1 :'i ,Ill II
t -il\ 11'111'1i:
. 11I! II Ii!!
,JIIIII!i\1
II111II'1
.J!'I!. li,l:
b """1"
'1",:11..1.:",
.,' ;'i-II.-,
"! "j': 'i:1
_.,._ li.:!,I.
o
o
"
I ii,i,i! 'I',
f!: 1;'1'1'1:'
, Ill!!!:I'
t 1 ,',
..111' i:'I:I__..~.~,.
:'.::1'.-
') <I;
'I i:' ,:
," :;.!i!i
-;: r
"",.
.. ,1
1,\
L
~
I
'~
I'
~
,..~.'
I~ I
: k Ii
'. II I'
.;: \.
" "I ~
t. '- t -f.
_._ -'l'.-L-_.. L,1L... L.x.-
F:::-';'--
..j...~.+',.".... ~
\f-' .' ~
~i !
,t 't ..
t
t
t i
I i
! !
,I:
I'~
I
I~
I
1"
, I. '.,
: 1 ,,,
'II" .,
!.,l'l'jij!'
lIi'l. ,'11'
.;",j.l ",
I.,.
I '
11F""~!' ',~', I
I. ,.1
II~,~,
I 'I' I
II '
ill
I',
ii'
: I
, "
: I' ,';J
i 'L..._ ._ -. ,
. IL- .. . _...
'II - I "1' I ,I; ',II
, . II" t IL
I l!J I'
I" .-
!I 1 (,,1
, II, l '~, '
L-;-]
'Ii
':,I[
i l
I l I
IlL ....II,
11,1', '
,I t ! : I
"f'
,
'n""E' '"
!" ;!'I ;;
;: '[-~~-- i I
~'. I). j , : L : I
~._ I . 'ii~!h-;l .,.1."
'1' i' .
Ii..!
15:1
':'.~
, I
, ......'. '-J
. ~ l' ; ,
I -.....,........"....
~ ......
C;;'''''-''
.: Ii'
:: II ).,....,...
,
1..
~
.
i
I
L-....:_..
, ~~.
. 'if
'{l
.. '.~
. ,3
;f:..,
. )),
.',;}'j
. "j
" \
.'. ~
\
I
i
,~
I
i
"
,
I:
I
. ,
,
:1
.,
1
I
I
J
1
i
i
:\
\i
,
i
I
1
,
I
.'
I
I
:
i
I
,1
.1
';
I
I
I
.j
I.
l<
:\
!,
'I
I'
. ,
Rocky Mountain BankCard System-
Will F. Nicholson, Jr.
Chairman of the Board
December 3, 1996
Mr. Charles PatersoD, ChalrmaD
The City of AspeD Board of AdjustmeDt
130 South GaleDa Street
AspeD, CO 81611
Dear Mr. PatersoD:
I am wrltlDg with respect to the Notice of Public HearlDg cODcerDIDg Case _96-12, 111
West HymaD.
I am the OWDer of 119 West HymaD aDd am writiDg OD my behalf aDd also OD behalf of
Nestor WelgaDd who Is the OWDer of 117 West HymaD; each of us oWDIDg oDe-half of a
duplex. To the east of us Is aDother oDe-half of a duplex, 115 West HymaD, to which the
property proposed by Mr. SDare will be attached.
The records of the city IDdlcate that the duplex 117-119 was cODstructed ID the early
80's; 115 (belDg oDe-half of a duplex) was cODstructed sometime thereafter, the date of
which escapes me at this time. ID the origlDal deslgD, the property to be cODstructed by
Mr. SDare would be a mirror Image of 115 West HymaD. It Is my uDderstaDdlDg that Mr.
SDare proposes to build UDder that orlglDal desigD. If he Is allowed to do so with a
varlaDce, the 111-115 bulldlDg would be IdeDtlcal to the bulldiDg curreDtly at 117-119
West HymaD.
If the variance Is de Died aDd Mr. SDare proceeds UDder the code, the 111-115 duplex
would be asymmetrical, aDd therefore, less attractive to the Delghborhood aDd the city.
I hope Mr. SDare's request will receive favorable cODslderatioD.
!eZ0~"~,jL ~
--------- --
mm
c Nestor WelgaDd
950 Seventeenth Street
Denver, CO 80202
303585-7100
Fax 303 585-5570
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 5168
Denver, CO 80217
"......,
fl~7 Peauot Avpnue
Pew London, CT rfJ?O
City of Aspen Board of Adjustment
110 S. Galena Street
ASDE'n, CO 81f11
Re: Case #Gf-12
Dear Board memters:
I v.rish to rep-;.ster my stroflP" ol:1jection to the aODlication submitted h:v !4ill4.am D.
Snare (rPDrpsenb::'d hy lv~]J;am t,f. (;rirr-;t.h~ f'o-r;::; v;,:!p-i"'ncf' o~ rrf)('f'rtv at 1Jl itl. Hyman.
I submi t to you that e-rant-i Df! an B f V.!j r-; ;:lncf' ~n that the arpli cant can "conform wi th
thE' three pxi st1 ng dUD] exes ] ocat.ed on the parcel" is deft ni telv NOT a legi ti mate
reaSon f'or dol~ so. It's timt: to st.op the tnsidious attack on zoninG!' !"9e'uIat.io!1s i!1
rpsidential nei",hborhoods in Aspen. The existence of t.hree duplexes not conforming
wi th zonin", ref'ulations certainly does not translate int.o a reasonable excuse to
create a fourth such structure. Three wrongs do not make a right! 'Th~s' nEo-l9'hborheed _
or any other for that matter - should not be reduced t.o homof'eneous structures for
the convenience of a nuilder/own8r.
If vou will "'0 nack in ti.me to when Cottonwoods was built (124 W. HY1!1an) all three
floors were in place before a hei",ht discreDancy was challen'!ed and th.. builder was
reouired to have ..ach floor physically li fted-one foot was cut off be>t.wpen pach floor
to bring the building undpr comn]ianc" with zonini' re",ulations. I ask you now for the
same rigid enforcement of zoning regulations - Dlease do NOT ",rant this variance.
It's time the zoni.ng regulat10ns WE're enforced as .'1'ittcn and not treated as a joke
by "eonl.. who find creat.i.ve ways or "reasons" to justify bending the law. Inddentall~
it's interesting to note that t.he builder of the three existini' duplexps on thp "Darcr:
in question was also the ~uilder of Cottonwoods some years earlier.
P1ease examine city records - vou '''';]1 find that a permit for further devplopment of'
t.he land in question was denied a number of vears af'o - on more ~rounds t.han just
heil"ht alon". Amon", other thi n",s ,th" FAR would be well over the allowable Ii mi t for
the "t'arceln in Question. It W;:lS deemed wrong- then - ~nd tt is wronQ" new. This hu41d:i!
would nresent a solid wall of hou.ein", with hardly a bl,dp of grass or Dipce of skV to
be seen. Has anyone checked the FAR of this aDolication???
It is hardly accidental that t,his !1Paring is spt for the off-season when I rersona]ly
know that several of the peoDle most affected are not. only out of to,"" but are out of
the country-completely unaware of this develonrnent ann therefor anable tv respond.
O~f-season seems to ~e ODen season for zonin~ variance reauests. Ifm sure you know
that there's a sa:vin'" in As Den that "if you wait lonf' enouf'h you can ",et ,,'hatevE'r you
l".rant throuG"h zonin~n - T ljrme that th:i s is not Q"oin2' to ~e the resu1t in this case.
This neighborhood has been imDact.ed enough - , permit for a similar huildin", at this
locqtion on this "Darcel" of land ~r.qs ri2'htfully denied by res eons} bIe zoninl'! b~ck thE'f
I submit that it was a '~se decision t.hen and reouest that the nresent Poard ,dhere t.o
t.he ori",inal decision.
I sincerE'lv regret that I am unable to be oresent rersonal1v to sut",i t rroy very strong
oc,jection. but hODE' that the rrpsent zoni nf' boa rd wi] 1 considE-r this reauest. in a
thou2'htful, resDonsible manner. As a 16n~ time ASDFnlte, I can only hODe for fairness
au? li tv of life in As Den has certaj nIy chanf!ed in recent years, !JS it l,as tn many n1 ~C~
but. Aspen has always been a very sDecial nlace. It. is up to those who choose t.o make
it their home to take a stand a~ainst Drojects that ~re clearly not in the best intere,
of t.he community and to take responsibility for seein", that everyones rights are
rrotected. Please help to rrotect. the intef'rity of our ne.i~hborhood h~enyini' thts
variance. ~. ~ SincE'rely Y0.1J:l.;;tt,,&:1/4f; ,
/~I ,"1izabet~ Traggis wv;r
R:lYYl)ond J. Koeni~
~6ttonwoods -2F 124 W. Hyman
j -"'S'\0J
\:i ~ z 0..\'9
~~~ <II -l=',..
f;;' .: -.,J '"
"-s ~~ t"'''''~
~ 0<11",
o ~?\ [~ c+
~ o 0 ::r
::lc+",
~ >.
~ (")<,...,.
,...,.~'1
~ O~..
0\. (I Jq
'" ""
N ,..
o II
~
,~
~~~
'^ ~~
=tJ _ ~
~ &)
~~
\~ l l
~ti
~
~
~
~
~
-
~
-
-
: ~
-:-~-f
== (":', C':;
:: ~ :~~~
=-(:;.;-.M &;
:~~
....~rI m
....e")
m~
"V
-I
::lON-:z
tD ::J ~ C>>
- Q. 3
~ _2~
::> ~&j ,
-.n
2'"
I I
Ll
0
a-
0 1:1:1
,..1.
a- f'"
'"
a- ,.".
.J:: I
I'~'
0 J'
.-,\
.J:: (,'I
ru
1$'
,..,.
,,'
~
,>-
-a ~
--
~t;~
'g 0 ~
:::s ~ 0
"'"
(") '" :.-
o ~ r.I
1-' <II d
~ ~ ~
~
o Jl I
c+
gl ~ ~
.~ c:D SU
~ c+ a
o
"'"
5:
u.
~
rn
i
~
p
/
. ". .....
, ~'\i I...... ***.
'~_'*'" I
,1,'//1111 '
.II" ' .1l'I,,,,,
.+' ~'; lrJ5i
"ro''''''IN>