Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.lotsq,r,s,blk92,lots11,12.028-74 ,..'"",,, .......~" '..4 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case No.74-28 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 Council. Room, 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 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 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: July 25, 1974 3:00 p.m., City Council Chambers Name and address of Applicant for Variance: Name: Address: Walls & Sterling, Architects P. O. Box 29, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Location or description of property: Location: Description: Lots Q & R and the westerly 7.5' of Lot S, Blk 92, City of Aspen and Lots 11 & 12 and the westerly 7.5' of Lot 10, E.Aspen Tnsite. Variance Requested: SEE ATTACHED. Duration of Variance: (Please cross out one) ~ Permanent THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BY~~c?:f~~ By AP -, . r..'" i....rrI:,:~;_, r~ L.(}.\r:.~ OF ......._-.. . .~ . - ~,... ;". r 1,! r, ~~ r ~ ; ~ :. , CITY OF ASPEN DATE July 17, 1974 'J I'"' CASE NO. I': '~~.~~iI ..*ul0.0(J APPELLANT Walls & Sterling, Architects ADDRESS P.O. Box 29 Aspen, Colorado 81611 'OWNER RBH Joint Venture ADDRESS P.O. Box 1166 Aspen, Colorado 81611 LOCATION OF PROPERTY Lots Q & R and the westerly' 7.5ft. of Lot S, Blk. 92, City 01 Aspen, and Lots II & 1.2 and the westerly 7.5ft. of Lot 10 (Street & Number of Subdivision Blk. & Lot No.) . East Aspen Townsite Building Permit Application and prints or any other pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made a part of CASE NO. The Board will return this application if it does not contain all the facts in question. Description of proposed exception showing justifications: Please see attached letter. Provisions of the Zoning Ordinance requ~r~ng the Building Inspector to forward this application to the Board of Adjustment and reason for not granting permit: APPLICATION 'IS MADE FOR A VARIANCE TO PURCHASE REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN FOR A PROPOSED .OFFICE BUILDING. The proposed office building is located in the C-l Zoning District. Required off_street parking may be leased or acquired from the City of Aspen in the C-C Zoning District, but not in C-l District. Sec. 24-9(f) "Location of required off_street parking". Chief Building Inspector Status PERMIT REJECTED, DATE DECISION S~gn d H. Meyring DATE APPLICATION FILED DI\TE OF HEARING MAILED Sccrct.lry 1..-,-. ...... '-' ~ -...,/ ~~ V'iTalls & sterling architects aspen, colorado member's a.ia./p. o. box sa/Zip oode Bl8l1/Phone aos-saB_aalB OWNF.RS OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO RBH JOINT VENTURE SITE To the south: }\g0 ~D~ ' 1) St. Mary's Catholic Church Aspen, Colorado To the west: 2) Pitkin County (County Gourthouse) Box 1, Aspen, Colorado To the east: )) Callahan, Elizabeth Borstner Box 205, Aspen, Colorado To the north: 4) Bealmer, Stanley (Lot 7 & west 20 ft. of Lot 8, Blk. 19) Box 498, Aspen, Colorado 5) Gignoux, Natalie (Block 20, Lots 1,2,),4,5) Box 687, Aspen, Colorado '--_,1,_______.___ , ...... '-"' - '-"' ~~ vvalls & sterling architects aspen, colorado members a.ia. / p. o. box as / zip oode elan / phone aDa-sa B-sale Board of Zoning Adjustment City of Aspen Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 July l7, 1974 Dear Sirs: we would like to request a hearing for a variance on the off-street parking ordinance for our clients, the RBH Joint Venture Office Building. For some time now we have been going through the review process with the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding this project and one of the items that has constantly plagued our review process has been the off-street parking requirement. At the time of conceptual review, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved our project contingent upon the fact that we would not supply any off-street parking and indicated that they were writing a new ordinance. At that time, our clients agreed with this proposal. Since then, the parking question has moved back and forth many times and at a meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission Tuesday, July l6, they reconnnended that our clients now have two options. One option is to supply on site, off-street parking based on the existing code; the other option is to apply for a variance so that our client can lease the required parking (based on the existing parking ordinance) from the City. Even though our clients can supply the required off-street parking (10 parking spaces, based on the existing code), they have elected to lease this parking because of the proximity of the Rio Grande parking area owned by the City. In line with the reconnnendations that the Planning and Zoning Commission has given us, we respectfUlly submit our application for a variance to the off-street parking requirement so that we might lease the ten (lO) spaces from the City. Since we have been in this process since January, we would like to have a hearing regarding this matter at the earliest 'ble date. --...1 July 25, 1974 / / / / ~\1 COUNTY ATTORNEY PITKIN COUNTY P.O, BOX 4096 ASPEN, COLO, 81611 HAND DELIVER City of Aspen Board of Adjustment c/o Ms. Lorraine Graves City Clerk City Hall Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Case No. 74-28 Dear Mr. Dukes: The above-numbered case, involving an application for a variance by Messrs. Walls and Sterling on behalf of the RBH Joint Venture will be heard today at 3:00 p.m. Notice of the variance hearing was mailed to the County by letter postmarked July 19. It was not received by the County and forwarded to me until Tuesday, July 23. Under Sec- tion 2-22 of the Aspen Municipal Code, that is almost the minimum possible notice. More importantly, the notice arrived so that there is no intervening meeting of the Pitkin County Commissioners, who meet, as you know, on Mondays. Therefore, I must formally ask on behalf of Pitkin County that the hearing be continued, on the ground that the County has no sufficient opportunity to assess the application and its possible effects upon Pitkin County's interests. I gather from talking with Sandra Stuller that the application could affect traffic flow in the vicinity of the Pitkin County Courthouse. Therefore, I would like the opportunity to review the application in detail and to raise the matter with the Commissioners on Monday, July 29. It is of course possible that the Commissioners will not object to the variance as it is, and hence that this request for a continuance might seem needlessly to inconvenience the ap- plicants and your board. On the other hand, all can easily under- stand that governmental bodies need additional notice time, especially when the governing body meets only weekly. In order to avoid such possible insufficient notice and inconvenience to City of Aspen Board of Adjustment July 25, 1974 Page 2 applicants and your board, I have suggested to Sandy that the City consider amending Section 2-22 (c) (1) and (2) to provide that in the event the adjacent landowner entitled to notice is the United States, the State of Colorado, Pitkin County, or any other governmental or special district body, the notice period shall be at least 14 days if by mail and at least 10 days if delivered personally. Sincerely, CLARK, OATES, AUSTIN & McGRATH County Attorneys By I ~lJillJIV' ~ucY!1cL l o / JNM/b z cc: Joseph E. Edwards, Jr., Esq. Dwight K. Shellman, Jr., Esq. J. S. Baxter, M.D. City/County Planner ,......... COUNTY ATTORNEY FITKIN COUNTY P.O. BOX 3707 ASPEN. COLO. 8lSll July 30, 1974 City of Aspen Board of Adjustment c/o City Clerk P. O. Box 2210 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: RBH Building Dear Mr. Dukes: \ \/.1;/ " ;/Y ,X ~t/ .~l rill . ~ j 1\. \ As you will recall, your Board approved a variance for the above project to omit off-street parking on the site of the project on condition that the applicant lease off-street parking from the City, among other things. You will also recall you conditioned the variance upon the Board of County Commissioners not having any objection at its July 29 meeting. This is to inform you and the applicant that, while the Board expressed certain reservations and concerns, it has no objection to the action taken. The Board of County Commissioners is concerned that street parking in the immediate vicinity of the Pitkin County Courthouse be not significantly affected by the City's policy with regard to elimination of on-site, off-street parking in the commercial core area, at least insofar as that area includes the Courthouse area. As you know there are a significant number of county em- ployees who work at the Courthouse and because of the location of their residences must drive. More importantly, the Courthouse as a business center, including operation of the court system and most particularly at times of jury trials, generates probably a large amount of traffic flow much of which is not easily eliminated. Naturally the problem is somewhat lessened since the City's park- ing area is not far from the Courthouse. On the other hand, the problem could be further reduced if it is clear that applicants City of Aspen Board of Adjustment July 30, 1974 Page 2 such as those involved in the above-named project would bind themselves to some sort of self-policing system to insure that at least the principals and employees of the project would actually use the leased City parking spaces. That is, while it may be impossible to police those members of the public who would go to the RBH Office Building, it is not difficult for the applicant to insure that they and their employees adhere to the essential purposes underlying the City's policies. Sincerely, OATES, AUSTIN & McGRATH County Attorneys By -1L J.u. ~~ IlJ (G,a.t y J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr. JNM/bz cc: Mr. Reese Henry, Jr. Mr. Jack Walls Joseph E. Edwards, Jr., Esq. Dwight K. Shellman, Jr., Esq. J. S. Baxter, M. D. Mr. Al Blomquist