The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutlanduse case.boa.201W.Francis.012-78 (~HL TO BOArm or- ZON I NG AL ,JSTf1ErlT CITY OF flSPEfl , :\7 ",.; , ? r-:>--l (-:> -, c:' - \ \ 1\ (::1 /78 ~ :1.7":7 ,DATE November 10, 1978 APPELLANT George A. Vicenzi CASE NO. ~-/:L ADDRESS Box 2238, Aspen, Colorado SAME PHONE 925-1196 ADDRESS O~JN E R LOCATION OF PROPERTY 201 'Pest Francis. Aspen, CO. (Lots F. G, H, I, BL. 49, City of Aspen, CO. ) . (Street & 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. I'?> /;;L THE BOARD WILL RETURN THIS APPLICATION IF IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL THE FACTS IN QUESTION. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOVIING JUSTIFICATIOnS: Please See attached LETTER. Will you be represented by counsel? Yes No X S I G NED :---:;4:t?/'l;(;~~~1/ . Appell an. ," PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO FORWARD IHIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON fOR NOT GRANTING: APPLICATION IS MADE FOR A VARIANCE TO DIVIDE FOUR EXISTING LOTS INTO TWO TWO-LOT BUILDING SITES. The proposed division would leave an existing one family dwelling with approximately a three foot side yard and an existing accessory building with no side yard. The required side yard for a prinCipal building and accessory building is five feet. Section 24-3.4 Area and Bulk Require- ments R-6 Zoning District Chief Building .rnsp~cto~ Status Signed Clayton H. Meyring DECISION iJ{'~J1.J DATE DATE IF H['ARING 11/3D/7Pi SECRETAR'(""Jj~~ PERMIT REJECTED, DATE APPLICATION FILED ~lAI LED , .~...~ '...." Box 1207 Aspen, Colorado, 81611 November 29, 1978 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Aspen Board of Adjustment City of Aspen Aspen, Colorado, 81611 Re: Case No. 78-12 Variance Re~uest Dear Remo, I am vrriting to express my concern with re- gard to the variances re~uested for Lots F, G, H, I, Block 49, City of Aspen. The present accessory buildings which now rest on the alley line in a non-conforming use and would also rest on the side yard line in both directions if the variances were approved are ~uite large. The tvvo-story wood barD, accompanying shed, and corral fences are in poor condition, offensive, and possibly a fire hazard. The proposed construction if the four lots are divided would present a problem of congestion and hazard in the area. ~vo lots per building site is just not enough space if all the accessory buildings are retained. We are long-term residents of Aspen. We built and have lived in our present home for over twenty years. We are located on the middle three lots of the block (N,O,P, Block 49) and across the alley from the site of the proposed variances. We respect what the ci ty is trying to do to maintain good ~uality in the area and feel having so many buildings in such a small area would destroy the intent of the planners. Unfortunately I am unable to attend the hearing on November 30th. But I shall appreciate your consideration of our concerns. Sincerely yours, 13~ Mrs. Beryl A. Erickson 220 West Hallam Street Aspen, Colorado, 81611 "...1.."...-. , , GAUFJELU & HEORT AT'l'ORNJl:YB A.T LAW . VIOTonrAN 6QUARB DUILDING 601 q~AST RYMAN AVENUE ASPEN} OOJ.oNADO 81011 RONALD GARFIELD ANDREW V. HEOHT November 29, 1978 TBLBPHON'B 1003) 92G-ltJ36 ASHLEY ANDERSON OHRlSTOPHP.R N. SOMMER ORAIO N, BLOOKWIOK LYNN O. ALBON City of Aspen Board of Adjustment City Hall l30 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 8l61l Re: G. vicenzi Variance Application #78-12 Dear Board Members: On behalf of our client, Mrs. Walter Paepcke, I am writing to request that you deny the variance which has been requested by George Vicenzi. Mrs. Paepcke is a property owner who would be affected by the proposed variance. Many of the homes in the same part of Aspen occupy more than the minimum size lot because they were constructed at a time when the primary intent of the property owners was not to squeeze houses onto every lot which might be available. The resulting feeling of space should not be diminished by granting variances to allow the construction of new houses which would increase the density in Aspen's most historic residential area. The circumstances of which the applicant now com- plains were obviously known to him when he purchased the property only five months ago. It is highly unlikely that the zoning law has resulted in unnecessary hardship to the applicant. If there is any conceivable hardship which the applicant may feel he suffers at this time it is entirely due to his own _ actions. A variance which adversely affects other owners in the area and which is contrary to the purpose of the zoning code should not be granted just because he has purchased the property with the expectation of gaining substantial economic advantage from the sale of a new building site. Very truly yours, GARIFELD & HECHT 7tt~ Christopher N. Sommer CNS/pa : I /J /;' ~;/q / / ,A-/'y ~'&/jj,c4~f/ ~/;i'(;7!/ . c vi.... , ('dtH-O'i/w/~~ ~ . {f-t!llJ; /f'lt Vp-;r41 t1JJ:<;,7+n.eJL/- /3d J,. &II/~~. ;/l Ufu.vV)' I)f:r' . ,J/H.iI~t~' . . J~ i AI:/~a/ /..:"' ). :k;; ~vL' /LLtJ-..Afc.t:& l'-u{ t4.ju"C/ -t? 7"'''-1/ ~c.t 7i.H' A 7, -1t' I. . . )! ~--,;,..uk ~~.4;~'7j~~;/ ~, d/ ~~~/ ~1/Z/<.L-~.d a~ . d/ ~JI"?';t'~~;t- d-L.-t;/ '2i,--,-, UJ./.;/;j ~ U/ p~. :A~~7;j(-<J M ;$t<~Lj- .. ~~ . (/'. c:C..; ",-,' . v ~-r /'7tfn"t -r . ' '~WdiiJl ~ ~4')(- C. j <7 ,'",-, is- 4- .::J/F<-t . y' ~~' ~~7 ,.,....0.... ----...1..", . , .J J C~J.~ .~~~=Ir~;/C'~ ~ /7Y1-r/ jr az:t.~!0duJ /7rutLk{f .. ~-I-LU -rtL-k~ c//-/<-';(; /:~-,/- .?u-o. /2"-. ~ Uy~~~.L ~v~~D~.-J~'~~ >>/1u! r/~ .~er'~1/ ~. . ,- ,', ...... ~~ 'i,. . . -, -.."" " CITY {J)lF ASPEN 130 south galena street aspen, l'olorado, 81611 TO: Board of Adjustment Members FROM: F. George Robinson RE: George Vicenzi, Case # 78-l2 DATE: November 30, 1978 Mr. F. George Robinson called the Clerk's Office on November 30th, 1978 at.9:l0 M1. He stated that he owns a house that was built in 1949 at 200 W. Hallam which is located at First and Hallam Streets. He is opposed to granting a variance to George Vicenzi. Considering Mr. Robinson is in Denver at this time, he could not voice his opposition in person. GR/pr c.,'______,____~_ _ _.~_I....__............* CITY 130 s treet 1611 TO: Board of Adjustment Members FROM: F. George Robinson RE: George Vicenzi, Case # 78-l2 DATE: November 30, 1978 Mr. F. George Robinson called the Clerk's Office on November 30th, 1978 at 9:10 M1. He stated that he owns a house that was built in 1949 at 200 W. Hallam which is located at First and Hallam Streets. He is opposed to granting a variance to George Vicenzi. Considering Mr. Robinson is in Denver at this time, he could not voice his opposition in person. GR/pr "'4d./tP~. .~ ;:;;t~-x/ b-6- / ;1-t-~2J; If?f /3d I..q~;t ~/" ~<. .JA<ff~A<-J .' J~;t Jler/ cb-< . . ';f ...w<-"kI4/1-- AE.cp.~H'-" ~,i ~"" / -if ~~'I1~f', 7i J..</ A 7,-1f . pi ~..AA'...e.~~AL 11/-1uij<;'7j~~/ <---;1i.h", d/ flE.L-<..d~v ~.'_I_<J11v-~4L d-t.-t 7/v.-' d/./d.,./ /hL.' (,</ p~::~ :-A,;'7(j(-?J IUH$u.:e:./j- ~-tz.. c ~' ~. . L/ ~-;:f-jJ-t:thUlt 1r - '. ~~U-c!fiJl !17fuA~4;JI / ~~ f" '7 E ,<L; P 4- %.~t . ~J ) ; I/-Y~'h,~~ v&.~..C"-"...-&- chJ :?lL~. ~. .-c/- '*.' ~ y ~ff.L '74t/l~::~ j "'/7 J C~~~/~/.; '. ;/&j ~/?n-~ ft- a7if~~ ~r7 -r-L<,_e: c:!~ ~+ ~-t'-v /21'- ~~ u~-d{/~/ ~ ~,l--c..v ",..J ~ ~, $~<:C- /J /JuI {I{~J~/ ~~/L ~ ~t!/ /~. -.-------- Box 1207 Aspen, Colorado, 81611 November 29, 1978 Remo Lavagnino, Chairman Aspen Board of Adjustment City of Aspen Aspen, Colorado, 81611 Re: Case No. 78-12 Variance Re~uest Dear Remo, I am writing to express my concern with re- gard to the variances re~uested for Lots F, G, H, I, Block 49, City of Aspen. The ~resent accessory buildings which now rest on the alley line in a non-conforming use and would also rest on the side yard line in both directions if the variances were approved are ~uite large. The two-story wood barn, accompanying shed, and corral fences are in poor condition, offensive, and possibly a fire hazard. The proposed construction if the four lots are divided would present a problem of congestion and hazard in the area. Two lots per building site is just not enough space if all the accessory buildings are retained. We are long-term residents of Aspen. We built and have lived in our present home for over twenty years. We are located on the middle three lots of the block CN,O,P, Block 49) and across the alley from the site of the proposed variances. We respect what the city is trying to do to maintain good ~uality in the area and feel having so many buildings in such a small area would destroy the intent of the planners. Unfortunately I am unable to attend the hearing on November 30th. But I shall appreciate your consideration of our concerns. Sincerely yours, I},G~ Mrs. Beryl A. Erickson 220 West Hallam Street Aspen, Colorado, 81611 ...... '-' GARFIELD & HEORT ATTO.RJlfBYS AT LAW VIOTORIAN 89UABE BUILDING 601 BAST HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN} OOLORADO 81611 RONALD GARFIELD ANDREW V. HEOHT ASHLEY ANDERSON OHRISTOPHBB N. SOMMER ORAIG N. BLOOXWIOX LYNN O. ALBON November 29, 1978 TBLBPHO:!'I'B (303) 923~1988 City of Aspen Board of Adjustment City Hall 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 8l6l1 Re: G. Vicenzi Variance Application #78-l2 Dear Board Members: On behalf of our client, Mrs. Walter Paepcke, I am writing to request that you deny the variance which has been requested by George Vicenzi. Mrs. Paepcke is a property owner who would be affected by the proposed variance. Many of the homes in the same part of Aspen occupy more than the minimum size lot because they were constructed at a time when the primary intent of the property owners was not to squeeze houses onto every lot which might be available. The resulting feeling of space should not be diminished by granting variances to allow the construction of new houses which would increase the density in Aspen's most historic residential area. The circumstances of which the applicant now com- plains were obviously known to him when he purchased the property only five months ago. It is highly unlikely that the zoning law has resulted in unnecessary hardship to the applicant. If there is any conceivable hardship which the applicant may feel he suffers at this time it is entirely due to his own actions. A variance whiCh adversely affects other owners in the area and which is contrary to the purpose of the zoning code should not be granted just because he has purchased the property with the expectation of gaining substantial economic advantage from the sale of a new building site. Very truly yours, GARIFELD & HECHT 7!:C~~ Christopher N. Sommer CNS/pa '" ,'" ,--",'/ NOTICE Of PUBLIC HEARING Case No. 78-12 BEfORE THE CITY OF ASPEN EOAm Of ADJUSTME1'T , TO ALL PROPEKry 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 Council Room, City Hall, Aspen, Colo- rado, (or at such other place as the meeting may be then adjourned) to consider an application filea with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for variance f~om the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 24, Official. Code of Aspen. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their vie"ls, protests or. objections. If . . you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state. yorrviews 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 ovmers 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 Meetinl1: Date: Time: November 30, 1978 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers Name and address of Applicant for Variance: Name: Address: George A. Vicenzi Box 2238, Aspen, CO Locat~on or description of property:. Location: Description: 201 W. Francis, Aspen, CO Lots F,G,H,I, Block 49, City of Aspen, CO Variance Requested: Applicatio~ i~ mad7 for a variance to divide four existing lots into two two~lot bUll~lng ~ltes. Th7 proposed division would leave an existing one faml1y dwel17ng, wlth, approx:r.~ately a three foot side yard and an existing accessory bUl1dlng wlth no slde yard. The required side yard for a principal Duration of Variance: (Please cross out one) building and accessory building is five feet. 'X1f~~DBn' Permanent THE CITY OF A~PEN BOARD OF ADJUST~mNT BY ~~~~AA) . Sheryl immen, Deputy City Clerk Secretary to the Board of Adjustment for Remo Lavagnino, Chairman . .' i I'"" '--' "'" - OVl"'-.t'- V' ._ .__.! BLotk. 'f9 _.__. ___n__n_ _.u ______ ._______ _ __ -______ - ----- __ _ .L_ LOIs _J) "\-_(:..__ _..__ .:0(),..""'e.~_('r .\H\1:h___________ ------ --- -.-- ~~l~.ol\l' to_'S.e.._m~~'__________.___ ....--.. 'r-..-.-.---..-.------u.-.- n _ .. _J1oc... 3Tov..;r-e~0l>_____________n._ __... Lits6<,8..,S. G:.~O"'3 t...F .i\ t>\o\'" 3 Oll'_________.n ----..--..-- ..I?:.~~S~_'f 3__I_uelA."~)--Cp\Q,.- ... Un' ________ .--. ,~-_....~,--. ,--- ._-~-_._--..__.,_. -.....-..,..---- ._-_._------._~._._-~---_..._- -_.._------------_.~~_._--_._._---_._--_._._--_._- .__". ____L--..1.<5T ~__~p,? \3_~\j" ~ L 4- \'-'\_Q.\L~-~~-<:.ks.DV\ u~_._ :.:_.L____..__.__u__________J?>~_~__\~ O]_,_As~~~-{-c..."-Lc) . .... _ ,.BLOc:.~.Sc:.. . .______ . _.__un____.______._ .--------0.- .____..~_LoTs_.A-C!."L~~.. Y;,)__Clt .R________Po...~\__A.__Eo. ~1I'..4n_._ .__~___u ___ I J _n .:_.u.___u_u.. ___ .__u____. .u_o_ _ u _u.___.___JJ.~7_RO~\fIa_()~___~t:u,___________ __. 0'___ __._ _uw_' __ '_u' .. __Ne"'U Ovl ea.v.i.lLcH,,-\,'\ S.l~II\V}'" --.- L;-ts k I L) ~/\ / N "5o~'" LU.<4- c.o..."\o,,, STVClh _____u.. J~O'l\...._?> L7.J7-A!:.f€h-,.Cdo"-u..- __ .E:J..Ot."'- 4-8'_____ __un_U_ _____uUn._ I L<s>1~_._PI G. _u____n _NO\O~E:n.tov.<"j\o.S ._________un ... .__._u.__ ._____1070. ~vo..~ s._1\1J~. ....__u._._____u_______ u_~ KV'OV\,O~\ 0...__ ...._m______________u - .,lo't R,~ C;T~ l{ I 0 ~o-e.\ c:\ "'T~OW\ct c;. C.o\\~d ov. lCI~ _DeV\llevQe'^'ev__~\~c:J~-m ..mu______ 177lD ll''''C.O\\I\)T. ,_~"eY')C()lo,_ . A"T,^l.J.,'t" TltevCra2- ~O'YI. 1.f"J. S' I A'S.(R'vI) colo. . 'BLock 5~ .. LO\~ K, L... t-~V' ~ .Wo..\\('V up,_ ?Q..e'pc...l\~ Yo R. Co. Ii lA. ~ 5 \ ~ '> _ ~ v. E ~n . ~e.1I I l1o"jcl LCL'-V o(-t' lc.e So I ~S" <;0. Leo.. Sctt\~ S"T. c...~ \'~~Cjc) ) :t LL . "...~~-_"".~'._',~_.."----"'--_.._.,~<"--_.~._...,,.-~._.--~ November 10, 1978 To: Board of Zoning Adjustment City Hall Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Members of the Board: I am requesting a variance from the setback requirements of the zoning code, specifically the side setback requirements for the house and garage on Lot H, Block 49, Aspen, Colorado. The variance is needed in order to subdivide Lots H and I and Lots F and G. The existing garage, located on Lot H, is a valid non-conforming exception to rear setback requirements; it was constructed in 1889, well before any such requirements. The problem arises because the Code appears to prohibit the creation of a new non-conforming structure, and the proposed subdivision would result in the house and garage extending into the side setback on the westerly side of Lot H. I feel that the variance should be granted because it meets the criteria set therefore. In addition, I am willing to extend the setback line on the easterly portion of Lot G from the required five feet to ten feet, in order that the total distance between the westerly end of the existing house on Lot H and what would be the easterly end of any new house on Lot G would be at least equal to and greater than the distance between them with the code required side setbacks. It is clear that the special conditions and circumstances were not a result of my actions. The house was constructed well before any setback requirements. Obviously, had there been such requirements at the time of construction, the owners would merely have had to place the house and garage five feet to the east, a simple matter before construction, but a difficult, if not impossible, task now. "Other properties in the same vicinity and zone" are not generally so adversely affected. Some buildings have been built since the adoption of setback requirements, and thus their owners have had the opportunity of avoiding the problem. Others are on one, two or three lots, and are unable to create two conforming parcels of property (i.e. each containing at least 6,000 square feet). The granting of the variance is "essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone" because, but for the minor setback problem, others would be able to have two single family residential dwelling sites on four lots. "....... 2 ,.... Finally, and perhaps most importantly, granting the variance '~ill not adversely affect the general purpose of the comprehensive general plan." Indeed, granting the variance will enhance the comprehensive general plan. Although there are several reasons for this, two are particularly important. The first is that potential density will not be increased if the variance is granted. This is so because under existing zoning I could build a duplex (i.e. add a unit to the existing residence), thus having a density of two dwellings. The second is that if the variance is not granted, the aesthetic integrity of a historic building, one of the grandest examples of Victorian architecture, could be jeopardized. If the variance is granted, it would remain a single family dwelling, and, given its size and historic and impressive architecture, not likely to be materially changed on the exterior. If the variance is not granted, only as a last choice, I will have to consider changing the present house into a duplex, and perhaps condominiumize the duplex, in order to afford to keep the property. This would clearly more "adversely affect the general purpose of the comprehensive general plan" that would be granting of a variance by virtue of a minor deviation from side setback requirements. Critical elements of the general plan are to "preserve our areas of historical importance" and '~o maintain the natural scenic beauty of... the Roaring Fork Valley" as well as r~reservation of our viability as a tourist area." It must be generally recognized that one of Aspen's unique attractions to tourists is the Victorian architecture, which is so well exemplified by the "Rowland house." That house, and the other classic examples, is what distinguishes Aspen from other ski areas such as Vail, Keystone, Copper Mountain, etc. The Victorian houses show that Aspen was a "town" with significance and character well before skiing was thought of. Surely we should take reasonable steps to insure the preservation of these historic structures. I am prepared to minimuze the effect of the granting of the requested variance. I will, if the Board requests, restrict building on Lot G to a line ten feet to the west of the easterly boundary of Lot G, which would, if effect, create a distance between the existing r~owland house" on Lot H and any structure on Lot G more than equal to that setback which would be in effect if the Rowland house were situated in conformity with current side setback requirements. Obviously the primary purposes of side setback requirements are to establish a mimimum distance between adjacent structures warticularly residential) and to preserve a measure of "open space." I can meet these objectives by establishing a 'new" setback line on Lot G. In doing so, and by granting the requested variance the Board can preserve, perhaps forever, an integral part of our past. Cordially, ~. ~v:~ George A. Vicenzi