Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.Block 47, Lot F.002-83 ., f, ,~~. CITY OF~ASPEN 130.'south galena~reet aspen, colorado .8'1611 303-925~:2020 . \I . 11 03. Z AGENDA ,~ BOAR,!;! MENTS 24, 1983 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4:00 P.M. I. lUNUTES U. CONTINUANCE OF CASE #83-2 LARRY YAW / THOMAS E. RAFAEL . IfI. CASE #83-3 J.R. WEDUM / HILL HOUSE CONDO IV.. AJOURN ~ f.~.._ CITY OF"~>ASPEN . ~ 130:south galena ~reet aspen, colorado Jh611 "303~925:.2D20 ~..,. . ~<63~0 ,. ....--- AGENDA BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT ~BRUARY 24, 1983 ~ CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4:00P.M. I. MINUTES . . ci) ----':'11. CONTINUANCE OF CASE #83-2 LARRY YAW / THOMAS E. RAFAEL . . III. AJOURN .'. .1"" f''-, ~ 53 - L- . .. ~I.t CITY OF'~ASPEN . ~~. ~ 130;s~uth galena ~reet aspe,n, colo r ado ...81611 '303-925:).020 '.,,; . - - AGENDA EClrIRD OF ZONING AOJUS'lMENl' C February 10, 1983 ~ City COUncil Chambers 4:00 P.M. REVISED I. MINt1l'ES II. CXN.rINUllNCE OF PUBLIC HE:AR:m; CASE #83-1 STAN MATHIS III. AJOORN (r .': . .. ~i.!,. CITY OF'~'ASPEN ,', .". .... 130south galena s1reet aspen, colorado ,,81611 303-22~..:.2020 'oJ "...,. - '-- . AGENDA 0ClARD OF ZONING ADJUS'lMENl' C February 10, 1983 J City COUncil Chambers 4:00 P.M. I. MINlJI'FS n. CONl'INUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING CASE #83-1 STAN MATHIS ~ ....--.,.,..- t\ '33 . z:. ,........ --.~~ CXlNTINUlINCE OF CASE #83-2 ~~ 1.1.......-1 I _ ......... H1lG1AN YNfl ARC.HI'l'ECI'S, LTD VI.J~ ~ ~ FOR THCWIS E. RAFAEL ct r(n~...4 ~v 1tY\I'l~J"{ '10 DEJ:'ERolINE FAR ...,.. ~ r'-"" , ,~ , 'IV . Z'ZLt'i3 ~ AJOORN o.q.e.rdA 0' IV. .- ..' -. . /""", ......... ,...."'!It., ~ 33 . .:2. . f, . Iff, CITY OF'~'ASPEN 130:~'outh galena ~reet . . aspen, colorado Jtl611 "". i 303-925-2020 ''0' .'~ ..- AGENDA 0ClARD OF ZONING ADJUS'lMENl' C January 20, 1983 ~ City COUncil Chambers 4:00 P.M. I. NEW BUSINESS II. (,) ~J:II. Case #83-1 Stan Mathis Case Jl83-2 Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd. For 'Ih:mas E. Rafael c:x:M1ITTEE a::M1ENl'S ]Y. V. ADJOORN r \ ,-.- ",. " . . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case No. 83-2 BEFORE THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR USE VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to the Official Code of Aspen of June 25, 1962, as amended, a public hearing will be held in the CbuncilRoom, City Hall, Aspen, Colo- rado, (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 24, Official Code of Aspen. All persons affected by the proposed variance are irivited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state.. yo~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 variance. The particulars of the hearing and of the requested variance are as follows: Date and Time of Meeting: Date: Time: Thursday, 4:00 p.m. January 20th, 1983 / / ..- 1 Name and address of Applicant for Variance: Name: Address: Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd for Mr, Thomas E. 210 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO. Rafael Location or description of property: 1 I Location: Northerly portion of lot F, Block 47 L City and 'lb\'iIlship of Aspen, CO. Description: Variance Requested: Applicant appears to be requsting a zero lot line which would require variances of all set backs which would over lap due to the small lot size. Applicant apperar to be requesting 768 square feet over the allowable FAR for the zone. Therefore altowing a 1,650 square foot single family residence plus garage and decks. Duration of Variance: (Please cross out one) Permanent THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BY Rerro Lavagnino, Chairman J;3y Joy Brooks ~ I. _ .,4,. APPEJ))" TO nOI\~D or ZDrlIflG ADJU:::TJ,1Cr1 r , . CITY OF ^SPErI ,.', ., , , DATE . 28 December 1982 ~. I ..:... CASE NO. ~e'. APPELLANT Haqman' Yaw Arcnilects; Ltd ADDRESS 210' South Galena', Aspen, 'CO ,. .r .' . . . "'~\ ," . Mr. Larry Yaw PHONE .(303) 92!7-286? OWNER Mr. Thomas E. Rafael ADDRESS Post Office Box 1168 Aspen, Colorado 81612 . LOCATION OF PROPERTY Northerly portion of Lot F, Block 47, City and Township of Aspen, Colorado . .-: lStree~ & Number of Subdivision Blk. & lot No.) , ," Building Permit. Application and prints or any other pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part of CASE NO. . . THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS.APP(ICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN Alt THE FACTS IN QUESTION. . DESCRIPTIOn OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOHING JUSTIFICATImlS: See auached letter and exhibits dated 28 December 1982. . Will you be represented by counsel ? Yes No X . ~. SIGNED: . Appellant ~~ . ': 'Statu ;:. PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR . TO FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON FOR NOT GRANTING:~~ ~ ~--\lL R-\~Z41~/~ ~~. w.--~ ~~~~-'I\J"""'4~L-o~, .'. . ~.1k~ j~,QlCiP. ~~.:E:;ri'~'k.k~~ {K~ '-- M wJ-f( 7r=1{7 n'! ^ ' , or ;~.ef3m; . ~ , sJ-1o~s'~' JWl' ~ ~ --,-~:V~ V~ f~ ..;(S;,f"t- 10a.ftu.9-b~L.fr~~~# ~ c;...;M. <;;~-t- ~.{.L. ~~ M.L'v::'ft ~Miu,,~~ -{4D1i' l 0 ~ ,- ;r . '1fr --;" U .~ ~~. C()8'~.44t --kk~~ '76~~.~i-, ~tL ~ , t'AQ.k~~'~rlL\,'__"~ ~ [(...;-0, ~R ')~t~ ~ ~ ' ,\wt~ {dt.JU . ' '.. ~. I; ," . // ~ :;e-s . Signed '. I " . PERMIT REJECTED, DATE APPLICATION FILED ldb-"'Ia-2..- . " .. . DECISION ~DATE DATE IF HEARIN~li(lnUa(y 20 I Iqf(-3 . - SECRETARY-d{)0 "f>1~ HA Il E 0 .. 4 .., ''''11_ 'U IJV/II\U VI l.U...4 leU I\U"JU"", I j ILm ," ' 11-=-..:..~.i... " DATE i8 December 1?82 C CITY OF J\SPErI , "! ~ I . . .,... . " ....~-z. CASE tlO. t,.( I' t! APPElLANT Haqman' Yaw Arc!inccts;" Ltd . r" ,,' . . . '."',0'.. ADDRESS 210'South Galena', Aspen, 'CO Mr. Larry Yaw PHONE (303) 925--286? t II OWllER 'I .\ Mr, Thomas E, Rafael '. ADDRESS Post Office Box 1168 Aspen, Colorado 81612 . U)'CATIOIl OF PROPERTY Northerly portion of Lot F, Block 4'7, City and Township . of Aspen, Colorado ' . ," JStree~ & Number of Subdivision 8lk. & Lot No.) .-: . , ". Building Permit"Application and prints or any other pertinent ~ ~ata must a~company this application. arid will be made part of CASE NO. . . THE BOARD ~lILL RETURN THIS .APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN . A[r THE FACTS IN QUESTION. DESCRIPTI01-l OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOHING JUSTIFICATIOtIS: :t 'i See aUached letter and exhibits dated 28 December 1982. I I , I I . " . . , . ".; . " . :-.. , . , .. . . 'Will you ,be represented by counsel , . ? y" .0 X ~wf SIGNED: . '" Appellant, ~ PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON FOR NOT ~RANTING: . . . . " . . . . . . . ....; . 'Status . ',' " . . Signed. , . PERMIT REJECTED, DATE . APPLICATION FILED 'IAIlEO - " . DECISION DATE IF HEARING .. , , DATE . . . SECRETA~Y . , ,,-, ........ ...."'"' -...- 28 December 1982 Board of Adjustment City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Northerly portion of Lot F, Block 47, City and Township of Aspsn, Colorado Dear Board Members: As owner of the above referenced Lot F, I seek variance to permit the construction of a single family residence on my property. Both the nonconforming nature of the parcel and its irregular configuration require that I seek variance with regard to setback and Floor Area Ratio in order for the property to reasonably accept the building of my house and thus be availed of the property rights denied by the special conditions of its nonconformity. HISTORY The size (1103 s. f.) and shape of Lot F are a result of a court parti- tion in settlement of an ownership dispute between the Shaw family and others, Lot F was thus a Lot of Record in separate ownership and not of contiguous frontage with other lots in the same ownership prior to the adoption of the Aspen Municipal Code, Under these circumstances the Zoning Code (Sec. 24-13,6 Nonconforming lots of record) provides for the right to erect a single family dwelling. Reference: Appendix, Paragraph A, LOCATIONAL FACTORS Located in the R-15 zone and fronting on Hyman Avenue, the lot is surrounded by a larger parcel under the single ownership of the Shaw Estate. Although no geological hazards exist, the lot is located at the base of Shadow Mountain adjacent to the old Rio Grande Right of Way and the city Icounty boundary. Excepting the level gradient of the old railroad alignment, the majority of adjacent land in the county is in excess of 30% slope and thus precluded from future development. Because of the physical constraints to future building development on the south side of Hyman Avenue and the build out existing on the ,.,.~, r", ...-._,~. ',"" Letter to Board of Adjustment 28 December 1982 Page Two north side of the street, it is our assumption that the City will not need to upgrade municipal services, including street improvement, to accommodate future growth in that area. The 11 03 s. f. parcel itself is 30 ft. wide at the dimension adjacent to Hyman Avenue and averages 37 ft. in depth. Reference: Exh ibit A, attached Exhibit B, attached ZONING FACTORS Application of current R-15 zoning criteria to the size and dimensions of Lot F result in the following conditions: Minimum Lot Area: 15,000 sq. ft. Setbacks: As indicated graphically on Exhibit C, the allowable building area remaining from appl ication of setback criteria is 30 sq. ft. Building Height: Allowable Floor Area: 1103 s.f. (lot area) x 80 100 25ft. = 882.4 sq. ft. Above Grade Deck & Balcony: 15% x 882.4 (A.F.A.) Garage: Permitted exemption from A,F.A. = 132.4 sq. ft. 600 sq. ft. The effect of setback provisions and the allowable Floor Area consti- tutes both a general hardship and denial of a substantial property right caused by the existing circumstance of the property shape and size. VARIANCE REQUEST In consideration of the adverse conditions affecting the construction of a reasonable single family dwelling on this site, I respectfully request the Board of Adjustment grant variance to permit the following: A, Reduce the setback requirement to permit zero lot line building area. This would allow a building footprint (ground floor), excluding a 2 car garage of approximately 450 sq. ft., of approximately 650 sq. ft. B. Enlarge the Allowable Floor Area to permit the construction of a single family dwelling of approximately 1650 sq. ft. . . ,., /'"' '- ,," Letter to Board of Adjustment 28 December 1982 Page Three My request for variance is based on the following factors: 1. Zero lot line coverage will not adversely affect the character of the immediate neighborhood because both physical and zoning constraints will likely limit adjacent development to only one additional single family dwelling. Being of both continuous frontage and of single ownership, the individJal lots within the adjacent Shaw Estate parcel do not separately constitute nonconforming lots of record. The Shaw parcel would thus be regarded, as a conforming lot and development allowed only in conformance with the orovisions of the current zoning code, 2. As shown on Exhibit C, the distance from the front property line to the existing edge of Hyman Avenue is approximately 19 feet, which should be adequate dimension for the future development of sidewalks, utility upgrading, street improve- ment, etc, 3. As shown on Exhibit 0, the example of two level floor plan is designed to the zero lot line configuration of the site and includes provision for allowable deck areas and a two vehicle garage within the defining boundaries. The resultant 1650 sq. ft. dwelling unit is a minimum but reasonable 2 bedroom accommodation which would adequately serve the needs of my family, and be visually compatible with existing neighborhood development. 4. I submit that the conditions surrounding my request for variance have basis in each of the Code referenced "valid reasons for granting a variance" as denoted below: a. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. b. That special or extraordinary circumstances apply to the subject property that do not apply similarly to other properties in the same vicinity and zone, c. That the granting of a variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, but denied the subject property because of the special conditions or extraordinary circumstances. d. That the granting of the variance will not adversely affect the general purpose of the comprehensive general plan. (Code 1962, Sec. 11-1-12; Ord. No. 21-1967, Sec. 1; Ord No. 35-1974, Secs. 1, 2; Ord. No. 42-1976, Secs, 1, 2; Ord. No. 12-1979, Sec. 1). , " .. ",J Letter to Board of Adjustment 28 December 1982 Page Four I appreciate the consideration of the Board in reviewing my request for variance and urge a positive outcome for the reasons outlined herein, Very truly yours, for~Thomas 10 :.::;~ At;,~". Ud Enclosures , Jf"..." - APPENDIX , PARAGRAPH A Sec. 24-13.6. NONCONFORMING LOTS OF RECORD. (a) Where, at the effective date of the adoption of this or any code or amendment hereto, a lot of record was in separate ownership and cannot meet the minimum requirements for area or width, a single- family dwelling and customary accessory buildings may be erected on any single lot of record provided: (1) Such lot is in separate ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same ownership; ;,' (2) This provision shall apply even though such lot fails to meet the requirements for area or width, or both.. that are generally applicable in the district, provided that yard dimensions and requirements other than those applying to area or width, or both, of the lot shall con- form to the to the regulations for the district in which the lot is located. Variances of yard requirements shall be obtained only through the action of the board of adjustment. (b) In residential district where two-family or multiple-family dwellings are permitted, the requirement for square footage of lot area required per dwelling unit shall be strictly interpreted with no credit given for fractional portions of the required minimum as a basis for constructing additional dwelling units, except in the R-6 residential district where a two-family dwelling may be erected on such a lot containing a minimum of eight thousand (8..000) square feet. (c) In any district, no hotel or lodge shall be constructed on a lot non- conforming as to minimum lot area for the district. (d) If two (2) or more lots or combinations of lots and portions of lots with continuous frontage in single ownership (including husband and wife as in all cases a single owner) are of record at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this zoning code, regardless of diverse times of acquisition, and if all or part of the lots do not meet the requirements established for lot width and area, the lands involved shall be considered to be an undivided parcel for the purposes of this code, and no portion of said parcel shall be used or occupied which does not meet the width and area requirements established by this code. (Ord, No. 11-1975, Sec. 1; Ord. No. 16-1980, Sec. 3) ~--------- \~. ~- ,~ \- , 'J" ----=- ~ ;. -- 0. ,m I ct /-...........-__" POD I \ _, I -" ......-/ / '_/ x i o o :J 0. m C't . r I 0, ,'-- L ~ I" ~.~ o ,----------------.. '\ o ( , " ." ~.. ----- -- c~ W$ff~ 0 _ 19 % SLOPE -~ ~ ---..' \ ~ 20- 29% ~ ~ "'-.. ] r 30 % & ABOVE ~. '" ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "'~, '\ . i <:;j t~'S'~i .~.. ;' n ,I ':'~""" \ ~ '. \ > / I UJ '\ . __J ~v ~_ .~ ~ /-'pGJ _ =~ -- ~\ -- ----== r - -l /~:\ .---, \ I I;" _ _1 . , ,1_;" \~I,: \ ..// \-, . . ~.J"/ j {, \ , , \, i\ [: ( \ \ /' , " x~ o \ \ L/ \ / \ ; \ " \ ~:[ / -- ", -- "- Po 0 I \ __ __, J -"'-' ....--,/ / CJ-, \ --c -. L r "L ~ x-'--' '-" ~. o . ,.'~ , , , EDGE OF PAVEM ENT '~"""y""^iMr"'7A"""i~J"""""""" ::.:....:';...,. ,....", ,.,. ~:... :., ;":,, ": :1'7".;",. IAV/IE: ;:" 19,1' SET SET 575009' linE 30,01 i;:~~l":f~~J~~~fSH~\~P'" , 1!:.1"x~~-;:71,~;r'r, ". . -:~t~ . ' f '1,;k)i",.~i~~~~~"l!~'-\.' I -:. '~'1'?7:'~::.,::':.::-~'._~~.~~:;2~.!:: V~?!S~:.~~.~ -~ * ~ Y: \J f:1 t'\ \\' CI = ~ _~ 1>- ~~ ~ / I I 'I ~ ~ 1103:t 50.FT. :~ I" . z- m o o r-: N "ID Ifj ID w o lO <!.i <t SET '0 lO o <t (f) "- I ! I I U:.Ol' I'7I~olll "'710~~;-'''v ",,~,kK IF 0~OI! 01 D~ Y,AF'i/ "'~ ~ c.K EXHI IT'e . :-J- ---1 . . 'j. ..-. .i '_I': :: ., .. -;1+-' , I I I: ".Li't' 1'- .L r - -- -.. 1-; "'i,r ,,-j-H' . -;. -:-1 -l ~-. ._1..1 ._~.- ....,.--t-. ,; :i- I ;?O'- 0 II )." I VWK'COt1 I i I =1 ~i , ~I Dt-i I \) -\ J..-Iv I Hc" r.rJt.H t-- IN DIHIN" upm ~Ve-v "'7: /'1011:; I '-O;i BWRCO/1 1Of?{.... ~,~e- c 1&00$. (exc Iud' n4 qaro". u;A R~ B- .. 4"00 * wr~:: 1~'t4. 'l.. QI-f2. ~ ur .1:' EX' .-!-=-. ~---,--~---4 .;:hlIBIT t....o~tft. L..-~ve.t,.. ., ~ ,~ " ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS Following is a list of adjacent property owners to Lot F, Block 47, City and Township of Aspen: Michael Behrendt 334 W. Hyman A venue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Merrill Ford 303 W. Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 81611 Genevieve Birlauf 963 Wing Avenue Palo Alto, California 94303 Fernando Gonzalez Parra Ovaciones Lago Zirahuen #279 Mexico, 17 D.F. Kathryn K, Reid C.M. Clark Post Office Box 566 Aspen, Colorado 81612 C.M. Clark Post Office Box 566 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Jamie B. Robinson post Office Box 1186 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Mr. Wayne Chapman City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Thomas B. Campion, Jr. Post Office Box 528 Ketchum, Idaho 83340 \ &3,2, ., . - ~ c,-. HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD 4 January 1982 City of Aspen Board of Adjustments 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Northerly portion of Lot F, Block 47, City and Township of Aspen, Colorado Dear Board Members: Below is a list of the adjacent property owners to the above captioned parcel of land: ~ The Shaw Estate Being Handled by Charles Vidal 300 East Hyman A venue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Should you need any additional information, please feel free to contact our office. Very truly yours.. Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd ~'L C C/~{)4J 1?1, 171 I-vlcev Lisa M. Mosher Office Manager 1m 2"10 SOUTH GALENA SUITt 24 !\SPEN COLORADO 81611 303"925"2867 .. CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I hereby certify that I have served the within Board of Adjustments, City of Aspen, by placing a copy thereof in the United States Mail by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, 10 days prior to the Public Hearing scheduled for 20 January 1983, this 10th day of January, 1983, addressed as follows: Michael Behrendt 334 W, Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Merril I Ford 303 W. Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 81611 Genevieve Birlauf 963 Wing Avenue Palo Alto, California 94303 Fernando Gonzalez Parra Ovaciones Lago Zirahuen #279 Mex i co , 1 7 D, F . Kathryn K. Reid C.M. Clark Post Office Box 566 Aspen, Colorado 81612 C,M. Clark Post Office Box Aspen, Colorado 566 81612 Jamie B. Robinson Post Office Box 1186 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Mr. Wayne Chapman City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Thomas B. Campion, Jr. Post Office Box 528 Ketchum, Idaho 83340 Da ted: ~Mlla \0 Iq~ , ~f.~ Sheri L. Dentel Administrative Assistant Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd 210 South Galena, Suite 24 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of January, 1983. ~. L-/llt L..../Jt.Jo.I&rJ L' a M. Mosher, Notary Public Commission expires April 2, 1986 Pitkin County, Colorado CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I hereby certify that on Wednesday, 5 January 1983, I posted a sign on Lot F, Block 47, City and Township of Aspen, giving notice that a variance has been requested for such property and stating that a hearing will be held on 20 January 1983 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall. Dated: ~ ~/q53 _~ tJ# Kim Weil, Project Manager Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd 210 South Galena, Suite 24 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Subscribed to and sworn to before me this 6th day of January, 1983, i 7J1.C ?7c5'~'V i M. Mosher, Notary Public Commission expires April 2, 1986 Pitkin County, Colorado , APPEAl., TO nO/\IW or ZOrlHl9 ,^DJU:;TI][jlf CITY OF ^SPErI " , , DATE . 28 December 1982 ~ I . . .."... CASE NO. -;") .' ().- .~ APPELLANT Haqman' Yaw Arcnitects;" Ltd . . . .,. " . . . ", ~\ .' . . Mr. Larry Yaw ADDRESS 210'South Galena'.. Aspen, 'CO PHONE (303) 925-2867 OWIIER Mr, Thomas E, Rafael ADDRESS Post Office Box 1168 Aspen, Colorado 81612 , U1CATION OF PROPERTY Northerly portion of Lot F.. Block 47.. City and Township of Asoen, Colorado ' . .-: lStreet. & ~lumber of Subdivision Blk. & lot No.) Building Permit. Application and prints or any other pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part of CASE NO. , . THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS.APP(ICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION. . DESCRIPTIOn OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOHING JUSTIFICATImIS: See aUached letter and exhibits dated 28 December 1982. . . . .... - " CITY OF ASPO . MEMO FROM JOY A. BROOKS March 18, 1983 Dear Board Member, I am currently in the process of transcribing the minutes from the Board of Adjustment meeting held on February 24, 1983. I will definitely try to get these to you before the meeting to be held this Thursday; 3-24-83. Respectfully Yours, 60 !xro0 c "" ...J e~-+fQ -#53' 2.. . RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ! '01111I\1 C.'.Il0[Cl(El8.8.IltL.CI), ORDINANCE NO. 1\ (Series of 1982) i ,I AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 24-3 AND 24-13 OF THE ASPEN MUNICI- PAL CODE BY AMENDING THE DEFINITIONS OF BASEMENT, SUBBASEMENT, SUBGRADE AND THE SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATION FOR MEASURING FLOOR AREA FOR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS; AND FURTHER AMENDING AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS TO INCLUDE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREAS FOR SINGLE- FAMILY AND DUPLEX STRUCTURES IN THE R-6, R-15, R-30, R-40 AND R-MF ZONE DISTRICTS WHEREAS, as a result of recent construction of single-family and duplex residences in Aspen with excessive area and bulk, num- erous residents of the R-MF neighborhood located at the base of Shadow Mountain did petition the Aspen City Council to place limi- tations on the construction of such residences, and WHEREAS, in response to citizen-initiated petition, the Aspen City Council did adopt Ordinance No. 50, Series of 1981, on August 24, 1981, imposing a three (3) month temporary moratorium on the construction and/or expansion of all buildings within the R-MF zone district within the City of Aspen, and , I I i i WHEREAS, the City Council did instruct the Planning Office to review and research the area and bulk issue and to recommend an appropriate solution to the problem, and WHEREAS, on November 24, 1981, the Aspen City Council did I , / / adopt Ordinance No. 80, Series of 1981, extending the moratorium on the construction and/or expansion of all buildings in the R-MF zone district for a period of one month to provide the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office additional time to thoroughly review this problem and propose an adequate solution, and WHEREAS, the Planning Office and the Planning and zoning Com- mission"uid thoroughly review the problem of the construction of residences with excessive area and bulk and did find that the pro- b1em is not confined to the R-MF zone district, but instead is equally of concern in all residential zone districts, and -or c ""'" .....J RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ,0IllII1O C.,, HO~tKrL II. I. I l. ~G. WHEREAS, on November 24, 1981, at a special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Planning Office did present several alternative approaches to control excessive area and bulk in the City's residential districts, including: 1) floor area ratios based on zone district, 2) volume ratios based on zone district, 3) floor area ratios based on lot size with a maximum upset limit, and 4) "sliding scale" floor area limitations based on lot size, and WHEREAS, the Planning Office and the Planning and Zoning Com- mission did after evaluating numerous approaches proposed for dealing with the area and bulk problems, did find that area and bulk is not a function of zone district but is more appropriately a function of lot size, regardless of where a structure is located, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did find at the November 24, 1981, meeting that the "sliding scale" area and bulk approach based on lot size to be the most effective method of limiting floor area for the following reasons: 1. The "sliding scale" approach realistically deals with the problem of substandard lots. 2. The "sliding scale" method deals more equitably with the great range of lot sizes found within each zone district than does a separate floor area ratio for ~ach dis- trict. 3. The "sliding scale" approach appropriately assumes that allowable building floor area for single-family and duplex units is a function of lot size. Therefore, the requirement is uniform across the City, works irrespec- , 'I I . tive of zone districts, and does not penalize an appli- cant because of where he owns property. 4. The standards provide a mechanism for increasing the allowable floor area in 100 square foot increments of 2 1f ~ I " ) ,,-, ""...... :) RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves '0111111 c.r.HOECKElB.II.6 l. CO. lot size and reflect a maximum desirable floor area for each lot size range. As a lot size increases, so does the ability to accommodate a larger structure up to a pre-determined limit. 5. The method is easy to explain and administer and can be readily applied at an applicant's request, and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on December 8, 1981, the Plan- ning and Zoning Commission did hold a public hearing to consider the standards incorporated in the "sliding scale" area and bulk control approach and did instruct the Planning Office to develop a 1 I I more permissive set of standards to compare to the standards which were initially considered at this meeting, and WHEREAS, at a special meeting on December 15, the Planning and Zoning Commission toured approximately fifty-three (53) single-family and duplex structures in various residential zone districts throughout the City of Aspen to evaluate the applica- bility of the two proposed sets of standards, and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the tour, the Planning and Zon- ing Commission did reconsider both the Planning Office's original recommendation and the second more permissive set of standards and did find that the original standards did provide the more appli- cable limitation consistent with acceptable area and bulk in Aspen's neighborhoods, and WHEREAS, in the absence of any information or testimony show- ing the existing 1:1 floor area ratio in the R-MF zone district to be inappropriate, the Planning and zoning Commission did determine that the 1:1 ratio for multi-family structures is not excessive but is 9n appropriate limitation, and ,. WHEREAS, no open space requirement exists in the R-MF zone district, the Planning and Zoning Commission did determine that existing setbacks have been shown to be insufficient in limiting lot coverage for multi-family structures in the R-MF zone district 3 '"!1' c ""'\ .....,I ) RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves fORMIt c.r,HOECKEtB.a.lltl.CI). and did recommend an open space requirement in order to restrict the possibility of setback to setback residential development for multi-family structures, and WHEREAS, the existing height limitation is 28 feet in the R-MF zone district and 25 feet in the R-6, R-15, R-30 and R-40 zone districts, and WHEREAS, since the Planning and Zoning Commission did find that it is appropriate to have a uniform height restriction throughout all residential zone districts, the Commission did, therefore, recommend the height restriction in the R-MF district i I I ~j 1 be reduced from 28 to 25 feet, and WHEREAS, the Planning Office did further recommend and the Planning and Zoning Commission did consider various additional changes to the zoning regulations to clarify the definition of continuous open space, basement and subgrade, and to clarify the methodology for measuring floor area, and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the December 15, 1981, meeting the Planning and Zoning Commission did elect to sponsor changes to the Aspen zoning regulations for the purposes of imposing allow- able floor areas on all single-family and duplex construction in all R-6, R-15, R-30, R-40 and R-MF zones in the City of Aspen, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission did adopt Resolu- tion No. 81-18, Series of 1981, on December 22, 1981, recommending such changes and establishing such allowable floor areas, and , WHEREAS, the City Council did hold an\ informal work session on January 25, 1982, in order to consider various area and bulk control approaches initially presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission including the "sliding scale" approach, and WHEREAS, the City Council did on March 1, 1982, tour the fi fty-three (53) single-family and duplex' structures toured by the Planning and Zoning Commission in order to evaluate the applica- bility of various limitations and afterwards did hold a study 4 " ~1 ,.:{ r' ,..... ''\ ,.,I ) RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ,QRIlIO C. r.tlHCKfl 8. 8.& l.CO. session to consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office, and WHEREAS, the City Council did further consider the recommend- ations of the Planning Office and the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion at a regularly scheduled Council meeting on March 22, 1982, and did elect to establish more permissive limitations than those recommended by the Commission in Resolution No. 81-18 or those recommended by the Planning Office, and WHEREAS, the City Council does wish to amend Section 24 of i , i I 1 1 I I , the Aspen Municipal Code entitled "Zoning" in order to establish allowable floor areas for single-family and duplex construction in all residential zone districts and to further amend the Code to clarify the implementation of these limitations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That Section 24-3.1(b) be repealed and reenacted to read as follows: " (b) \ Basement: That area of a structure fifty (50) percent or more of which is below existing grade, subordinate to the principal use of the building, and used for parking, storage, and other secondary purposes. Those areas beneath a basement shall be designated subbasement(s). For the purpose of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area, basements and subbasements constructed in conjunction with single-family or duplex structure in any zone district are not required to be subordinate to the principal use of the building." Section 2 That Section 24-3.1(ee) be repealed and reenacted to read as follows: "(eel Subgrade: Any story of a structure which is one hun- '. dred (100) percent below existing grade, subordinate to the principal use of the building, and used for park- ing, storage and other secondary purposes. For the purpose of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area, subgrade space constructed in conjunction with single-family or duplex structures in any zone 5 11" . , ) i!""\ - """ ....J RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves l fOllNW c. f. HorCKfl lI. 8. a l. co. district are not required to be subordinate to the prin- cipal uses of the building." Section 3 That Section 24-3.7(d)(4) regarding the continuous aspect of the open space requirements be and hereby is repealed. Section 4 That Section 24-3.7(e) be repealed and reenacted to read as follows: "(e) Measuring floor area for floor area ratio and allowable floor area. I ~ I I (1) In measuring floor area for the purpose of calcu- lating floor area ratio and allowable floor area, there shall be included that area within the sur- rounding exterior walls (measured from their ex- terior surface) of a building or portion thereof, exclusive of vent shafts and courts. The width of the exterior walls greater than 6" may be sub- tracted from the floor area if the additional width of the wall is used specifically for energy conser- vation purposes as determined by the Building Department. The calculation of floor area of a building or a portion thereof shall include above grade decks, stairways, balconies and any area under a horizontal projection of a roof or balcony even though those areas are not surrounded by ex- terior walls, when such areas are necessary for the function of the building. ) For the purpose of calcul~ting floor area ratio and allowable floor area, above grade decks and balcon- ies shall be considered necessary for the function of a building if used for required access, if the principal use of the building is non-residential. Above grade decks and balconies constructed in con- junction with a building or portion thereof whose principal use is residential shall not be con- sidered necessary for the function of the building provided, however, the area of such features is less than or equal to fifteen (15) percent of the maximum allowable floor area. All area included in a balcony or above grade deck which is greater than fifteen (15) percent of the building's maximum allowable floor area shall be included as part of the floor area calculation. (2) For the purpose of calcUlating floor area ratio and allowable floor area for a building or portion thereof whose principal use is residential, garages and carports shall be excluded up to a maximum area of six hundred (600) square feet per dwelling unit; all garage or carport space in excess of six hun- dred (600) square feet per dwelling unit shall be included as part of the residential floor area cal- culation. 6 "l :1 1: (""" ""- /" ""'; RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves 'Mil II t. Y. "a(clC{~ B. e." t. ca. i I I I i 'I (3) For the purpose of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area, parking areas and those sub- grade and subbasement areas not in conformance with the minimum requirements for natural light, ventilation, and emergency exit for the applicable occupancy group shall be excluded from floor area calculations in all zone districts. Basement areas and those subgrade and subbasement areas meeting the minimum requirements for natural light, venti- lation and emergency exit for the applicable occu- pancy group shall be included in floor area calcu- lations provided that subgrade and subbasement space in single family and duplex structures con- structed in any zone district shall not be included in floor area calculations. (4) Areas dedicated to mechanical operation of build- ings shall be excluded from floor area calculations in all districts. In CC and C-1 zone districts covered utility/trash areas shall be excluded from floor area calculation. (5) For Planned Unit Development applications in the R-6, R-1s, R-30, R-40 and R-MF zone districts, the allowable floor area shall be calculated by deter- mining the square footage of the entire land owner- ship, excluding existing rights-of-way and ease- ments, and dividing by the total number of dwelling units existing and proposed for development. The resulting square footage of land shall be used to determine the overall average of allowable floor area according to the provisions of 24-3.4 and 24- 3.7(d). In areas designated mandatory Planned Unit Development of the Zoning District Map, except for previously subdivided lots of record, the square footage of the entire land ownership shall first be reduced according to the provisions of Section 24- 8.18 of the Zoning Code. The reduced square foot- age of land shall then be divided by the total num- ber of dwelling units existing and proposed for development and the resulting square footage of land shall be used to determine the overall average of allowable floor area for the entire development as provided for in this Section 24-3.7(d)(3)." Section 5 That Section 24-3.7(d)(s) through Section 24-3.7(d)(9), in- elusively and consecutively, be renumbered Section 24-3.7(d)(4) through Section 24-3.7(d)(8), inclusively and consecutively. Section 6 That Section 24-3.4, item 7 under the R-MF zone district regarding maximum height which reads "28" be repealed and re- enacted to read "25". ,I ": 7 'lr \, 'i "''' ......, ".", ""~ ) RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FOIl" \0 t.', 1I0~ClC[l 8. 8. It l. to, Section 7 That Section 24-3.4, item 9 under the R-MF zone district regarding open space which reads "no requirement", be repealed and reenacted to read "35". Section 8 That Section 24-3.4, item 10, be amended by the addition to the area and bulk requirements the following allowable floor areas in the R-6, R-15, R-30, R-40 and R-MF zone districts: Lot Size Standard Allowable Sq. Ft. Single-family Structures 1 I I I 15,001 - 50,000 80 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 0 - 2,400 28 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 2,400 - 4,080 7 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 4,080 - 4,500 6 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 4,500 - 6,500 2 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 6,500+ o - 3,000 3,001 - 9,000 9,001 - 15,000 50,000+ Duplex Structures o - 3,000 90 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 3,001 - 9,000 30 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area o - 2,700 2,700 - 4,500 9,001 - 15,000 7 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 15,001 - 50,000 6 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 50,000+ 3 sq. ft. for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area 4,500 - 4,920 4,920 - 7,020 7,020+ Sect,ion 9 That Section 24-13.3(a) be repealed and reenacted to read as follows: 8 n_-lf il f"-" '-.... " ) ..,.., , . I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves i 'OIIM l~ C.'o HOECKEl D. D. I!l t. co. II (a) No such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity, but any structure or portion thereof may be altered to decrease its nonconformity. The above notwithstanding, single-family and duplex structures which have been individually historically designated pursuant to Sec- tions 24-9.4, 24-9.5, 24-9.6 and 24-9.7 of the Municipal Code and which are nonconforming 'w:j. th respect to allowable floor area, may be enlarged, provided, how- ever, such enlargement does not exceed the floor area of the existing structure as of the effective date of this ordinance by more than five hundred (500) square feet and also complies with all other area and bulk require- ments of the Code." J I ! . , Section 10 That Section 24-13.5 be amended by the addition of a new Section (cl to read as follows: J i " (c) For residential structures in the R-6, R-15, R-30, R-40 and R-MF zone districts nonconforming in regard to the allowable floor area per dwelling for the entire land ownership and restoration and repairs may be made with- out regard to cost." Section 11 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or por- tion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconsti- tutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining por- tions thereof. Section 12 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the ;c1 day of /?/rZ.Y' , 1982, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, 15 I I i days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of 'I Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the /2 day of Apr"\ , 1982. .~~~ 9 ] , ) -"..""'-, '''\ """.-." ,,' RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves , 'OIII1W C. r, HOECKrL8. a. A l. CO. I I I I I I '1 I I I I , i I j I , ATTEST: tt;; . . 1// A..// ,(~~;d '~ Ka~"~;ch;Ci(y" c)'"er~/ l/-/fI7($- FINALLY adopted, passed and approved the z1 th day of ;o/cV" , 1982. Hef!..~~ ATTEST: ~~~~~~ Ka ryn S. Koch, Ci y e' t/~Lf...--- I i I I I , I I I I I I I , I I I ! 1 i j 'I I 10 , ,. I II Ii , ("'~'" ....# " ) RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves I I I ,~. C,'.HO(CICEL8.8.IL.C(l, STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) CERTIFICATE . . j ation, publiShed in the City issue of a fJ~ /-s- of Aspen, Colorado, in its , 19~ and was finally adopted J " I I I 1.1 II I I I :~ 'j t I .. . I, Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was introduced, read in full, and passed on ~L ~J- reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Aspen on ~ /;1 ,19 ~ and published in the Aspen Times a .....eekly ne\vspaper of general circul- ~. I r . ' I . i j I i , and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on ;::z ,:~: 19~~ and ordered publiShed as Series of 19~ of said City, as provided by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the ::F City of Aspen, Colorado, this /~ 1 1.' I i ,~ : day , 1 g.J7g'. 'I- '. , ~~-'" City Clerk " , . ~ i SBAL I Deputy City Clerk j 'I " ',t j \ \ I' j ., ~l ., , < I t, .' " '>",/ :ft 53-2 " " ~r.dIl1' ..{ (.,.,-JlroN RECEIVED "I:1B3 CITY ATTORNEY'SOFllct STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC. 602 E. HYMAN . ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . (303) 925.3577 January 31, 1983 Thomas E. Raphael & Fredrick F. Head P.O. Box 4204 Aspen, CO 81612 Dear Sirs, We have examined the records of Pitkin County, Colorado as they ,pertain, to: That part of Lot F, Block 47, in and to the City and Townsite of Aspen, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Lot F; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of said Lot, 46.5 feet to a point 25 feet Northeasterly from and at right angles to the centerline of the former Colorado Midland Railroad Company's right of way; thence Northwesterly, along a line 25 feet distant from and parallel with said railroad right of way, to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot F; thence Northerly, along the Westerly line of said Lot, 27 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner thereof; thence Easterly 30 feet to the point of beginning. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. We find title to said description was created by Decree of District Court recorded April 13, 1964 in book 206 at page 452 as Reception No. 117488 and that part of Lot F., Block 47 was a lot or parcel of Record as of April 13, 1964. No split or division of said lots, other than passage of title, has occured subsequent to that date. Sincerely, Vice-President CCS /kgs -=ik 53 . z REAL ESTATE AFFILIATES Incorporated C~~:~==t " ""\ . , .-'"'1.. . _..J ! /~ 1983 February 8, 1983 Mr. Gary Esary Assistant City Attorney 137 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Rafael Application to Board of Variance Dear Sir: Please be advised that I appeared on behalf of the Shaw Estate at the above noted hearing on January 20, 1983. Some time prior to the hearing Mr. Rafael had approached me in regard to acquiring additional land from the Shaw parcel in question. At that time I advised him that there were subdivision problems surrounding this and other Shaw properties, that Holland & Hart had been working for some time on this and other parcels and that at the time of Mr. Rafael's inquiries the Shaw Estate could not alienate any part of Lot F. Yours very truly, "'_ / _ /',..c? ~ /7 ~//.~~J/ C. A. Vidal \"urtb uf )\cll iluilJing P.O. Bo:\: 3159, A"pen,Colorallo m(l}l Tf.lqdI\lIW; ;w:~) (l::~;)_.~;):)() '7.~ '~-~~ ~ tr <63, 2 , "''''' - " \:-J~HnlC'l ~_, ' 23 February 1983 Board of Adjustment City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Rafael Variance Lot F, Block 47 Dear Board Members, To determine both a reasonable floor area (A.F.A.) for a two bedroom single family residence, as permitted by law and to graphically indicate that no distinctions in resulting visual (architectural massing) impact exist, I am submitting two sets of floor plans for your review: Scheme 1 shows a three level residence which, in floor area.. complies with the existing allowable floor area of 882 sq. ft. Scheme 2 shows a similar three level residence of 1100 square feet which represents the maximum floor area that can be utilized within the zoning envelope established by yard and height limitations. Both schemes utilize the majority of the available ground level area required off street parking (enclosed two car garage) with the remaining space for a south facing entry and stairs to the upper living levels. The primary distinctions in the two floor plans are the size and functional utility of the individual living spaces. Our request for variance is based on seeking the agreement of the Board of Adjustment that scheme 1 (882 sq. ft.) creates spaces unnecessarily small and disfunctional, that there is no distinction in architectural massing that would alter appearance from outside view, and that scheme 2 represents a reasonable property right (utilization) that is denied by applications 210 SOUTH GALENA SUITE 24 ASPEN COLORADO 816" 303"925-2867 " ,",- ...., -' _......~.;.c '~*mrP L .....-. HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD Letter to Board of Adjustment 23 February 1983 Page Two of an existing floor area formula never intended for a nonconforming lot of this uniquely small area. We respectfully request variance to permit an allowable floor area of 1100 sq. ft. (an A.F.A. increase of 218 sq. ft.) and ask that the Board consider, because of the related two part nature of the variances, initiating the twelve month limitation of variance on 24 February. Thank you. Respectfully submitted, H'f:'~ :~(}r:r'" La~\ A..I.A. Principal V \ Ltd LY:lm l1 B3.Z; CITY OF ASPEN .. MEMO FROM JOY A. BROOKS 2 FebruaIy 1983 Dear Board Members, Please note the change in the agenda that I have enclosed in reference to the Meeting to be held on 2-10-83. Larry Yaw/Thomas E. Rafael have been dropped from the agenda and will be rescheduled at a later date. I will advise you of that change at the appropriate time. Mr. Yaw's letter is also attached for your conven- ience and answer any questions you might have regarding this matter. Thank you. c)CJ "4tB3. z / - "p .... HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD 27 January 1983 Board of Adjustment City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Northerly portion of Lot F, Block 47.. City and Township of Aspen Dear Board Members: Thank you for taking the time to conclude the first element of our variance request regarding yard setbacks on the above referenced lot. Your determination was equitable and benefited from a great deal of good input and dialogue. The second element of our request concerning A.F.A. was tabled, subject to more definitive architectural documentation, until 10 February. Upon returning to my office, I found that 10 February was in con- flict with a previous commitment. Because the hearing and the interests of my client will rely strongly on my architecturally oriented presentation, I request that our hearing be rescheduled until the Board next regularly convenes. I would appreciate written notifica- tion of the rescheduled hearing. Additionally, I respectfully request that the Board consider allowing the one year statute of limitations of variance not commence until a determination is made on the second portion of the variance. Thank you. Very truly yours, LY:sd cc: Thomas Rafael Ha~man Yaw ~rchi~s.. I UQN Larry Yaw, .I\A. Principal \ Ltd 210 SOUTH GALENA SUTE 24 ASPEt\; COLORADO 81611 303"92S"2B67 =l=t 53 . 2' CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I hereby certify that on Wednesday, 5 January 1983, I posted a sign on Lot F, Block 47, City and Township of Aspen, giving notice that a variance has been requested for such property and stating that a hearing will be held on 20 January 1983 at 4:00 p.m, in the City Council Chambers, City Hall. I also certify that I have checked such sign twice daily since date of posting to be sure the sign is still in place. Dated: \/40/8'3 Subscribed to and sworn to before me this 20th day of January, 1983. ~Lnt.~ Lisa M. Mosher, Notary Public Commission expires April 2, 1986 Pitkin County, Colorado Kim Weil, roject Manager Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd 210 South Galena, Suite 24 Aspen, Colorado 81611 '0 . .~ ,... u oM J ..........:_....._.: :';:~l ~'!....... _.....r~. ~'iJl!lIa ;.z ..~Wc:\ .. ~;17 I. ~l.o;. ,,.e.-,~t~. ~ -r.;tt.~ ?~ 0' 4P>,.)~ ~'/ //I(/~ rnvJ' On"'~" .. ""' DDft lCt \lOUIT U .~ roo ':'W ~Iio:: or .mll "It Sflt. U a;ua.uo afU ~I. 110. 12"1' IZ~ IC. UU,C "j' ... ) ) ) I I I I ) ) .!lii!l! P:wtltt, o. DlUI..- ~UT,. 1'....., .. c...,.ntS';', t.t...-.... ~. .... _ .. tor trial u u. Court. OIl dill l"u .., .f ~. &. I. 1..... ,.,.....t. te .. ....r IIlorwtoto,. e..re.t _nJ,. aU ca.. t(Jr trial ... ..U ..!aq. ;'.. J1.htUf ......,.are4 '" CI..PtOIi I. nRM't, DQ., .f 'CAe f'1,.. ~t .sT'Di""'. w.uiI 4J:Do tiUCT, ... ., ~u. "". WU, DQ., .... u. .,ud.....,' ,....,..~ Il7 ~l r.a.L.J.C, aAll VIlJ.l.4t4 I. 8IflilIf, ..... lu dh....,.' ... u....-pea, na..-.__ .. ..-1,....1"41 la MM11 ., u. ,lAlaUtt, ... ap.. 't.b. ...uL~l.... .t t'"... -.t.n- ., nt_. Uo .,_ _ Uot tIlo .-W.t ... ti..__ _ tile ......... bter al.1&. tMt ... endu"" wu _i .~-t1- _ .. ...au.. tllo .u.pti... .r tIlo -,1.01" I ODd Uo Ceort MriIII _004 .... _ ... ...1loo _ r.11r odftN4 ia tIlo .-I..., Oft ck1a t.Ille J.adt _ .f !Care'-, 19601, ..~ ....u.t.. eai. _tJon, aa.! It h ..__ ..... .aU ..,aiat. .... oat "'" _ h, ...by 41aaiaoedl ... TMDII'JIOI, u. "'.-'AAt ...bUtca4 1\1 .yj,!Ie.u 1:1 eu,.a.' e! !!Ii! \ll~~tt.... .1 the ~.terelab, lad t" Court _ria.(. could.,..<< ..U ..1..... &lid 'L'w !"&1...f1_!. ~~!~. ::-...: ~~ ...... iu.ily unMd 1Q v.. ".-..... DOni nit;, t.be 1_... .,.1JIItl! .. t..... ..unterc1.a1al &Dll tIN n""'l,. c..rwte 111 f.~T .t eM .t..bat, u.4 that. the all.....U.U .t .u ....u~ ... h eM ,,..,.rty ~..1_tter .,..it.i.ull)' dltKriW .... tt"" ... tat _ry ow. ..',. ~ t. p1a1o.HI 10 ..ua0fflal oM .:# 83 2 zy... )- . ,.... " ~ 1II'.lI~ ..f~ .._ ~. .. ellat tloo plah.itt aad ~ T~" 1a la,......!' .. Mt .... ,... uti. .r 1IIee~t 1. ~f' .. .... ).._,... "I ~~ -.....s.. ~ US" ...... th.!"Jef. "kNr.,., 1t 1t ""1Dn. Ab]t'lll~ ... ~, -,.~ .... 1.:rll ~:"r --.. :IiIlt ..t...eat "Nt_, at 1:h. t""" .r a., .. __;. or t:L11 ~~. ... at tId.. "-. :, die ......, tc tft a1q.le, er' l..bt ....1 JIl"!',.-rtT _tt.. 1. ... CitJ' e( ...... c-::tr .r nut?ll, ~ 'tt:.at.f' or CoIll",,-. .....1W .. t.u... t::a-wltl .ll1 fir let. C ... ~!: ,..,.rt .~ lc't " 1ft Me-ek 4? "..ut..tb ...n.... 110 c.... ......1. _ f..- * .....,. .... ate 0ruldI ..tlrcM ::"aeM:1" ~. tJte 1-* a...6u ~. tI.. ..~'7 14, 1." .... re- __ 1a _ In _1.00 at .... U8 of ':.. ~ t. ... ~t!1~ ~~ ~ ~ t';}~ ~, -III ... ., t:ld:i:" ~. Clelc:....., u. __ __ ... aU .f u1d Lot , '-' t!lo _r~1:' ,.,.. "'_f. _ &0 fo11_. oM'" ,.... h ~ aDI'pL."'tl, t-......,,~l c:a.--.s.. at tile .~n ~ ror Lot' !" 1" &lML .at, Cltl ~~. ~.-p..... =w;-..:. ;..:.;:~rlT ~ tiIIi u... bFtIIMa Let. " &ad. C. ."." fwt: !e . JII1.1It 15 teet .4.' -t:..'I"17.,t.... It r1,ctlt -.h' .. ... _It.. .f "'" r_. Oolonldo IlWbM"" ... ~a ~ af -n tllo_ ..... w,l, &laeI . ~ U fM1: ._.' ...rb .f .. .. aU ~ ~ .. ..u _u.. ~ a prlJ!t CIII t-"e wn...b 1'1_ of Mlct LM: , .... .u. ... --1:' u.. .f ... I .t ...u I1HIr '" _ _reorq ~ ... _ l1ao .r ..u :..-... I 11III , If too. to _ ..._t _ .r ..u Let '. . po1lft ... ... --t!l..l, u.. ., ... .... _, _ _rIF JO t_ ~ 'lIo ........l7 11M .r M.W Let , aM .. .......l:' H_ .t _to .a' lIjo-. _ to ... JOiBt .r l-.tP!!'!IIC. n I.J rill". ...-c. UJRlU &I<Il DIClQlKJl ..... --.uta f" ~ dtlo 1a ... to uta .... "scr1," ....1 _.., ......~ h ~ ~ ill aM 1:0 c. ilt'etIIaat, itl .....,.... .... ..at..... .... diet . f1.alMlrt ... _ rt.p&, dUe. er ia:.~'" I.. .r w aJt. M1.& .....J. ~...... e,. .r anr part tile...." alld dI.It add ,w.dtf ... U. nCNaHre GJ. U...... .ue t.......,. ..je1a..l .a,... ....rt.... etQ' et.i_, ,--tp\., del. er I.acere.C SA ... Ie ..u .....1 pI""MW"" 1t1" 811! J"tlrt thltNet. IT II NlT_ llil~. UlJ"1)JC AllD IID\IIll tIl&. ... cIor_t _ ,.......... r"" it. ...ou .. lIo .- 1a tIlla ..... ...... ''I 0fU CJJUItT t'kie 1"'. _, of .....rrh, L. D. \964. n_COIllIT. WfF.QHQ fJ. DARH"'lo\~ Ju.1p . -I- - I.