Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19941103 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOVEMBER 3, 1994 4 . 00 P.M. SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM A G E N D A I . CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL II. CASE #94-14 MR. & MRS . GUY SAUSSUS III . MINUTES SEPTEMBER 1, 1994 IV. ADJOURN RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOVEMBER 3 , 1994 Chairman Remo Lavagnino called meeting to order at 4 : 00 P.M. Answering roll call were David Schott, Jim Iglehart, Rick Head and Remo Lavagnino. Charlie Paterson and Howard DeLuca were excused. Ron Erickson arrived shortly after roll call . CASE #94-14 MR. & MRS. GUY SAUSSUS Dick Fallin, Architect for applicant : Presented affidavit of posting. (attached in record) Remo read request for variance . (attached in record) Discussion took place as to whether 6 feet or 4 feet was shown on drawings as a variance . Fallin: After measuring--It looks to me like the first sheet of the site plan is correct . It looks to me like 4 feet . Rick: It only talks about a front yard variance . What about the side yard? Bill Drueding, Planning Dept : That setback there was not the City- -that is the homeowner' s setback. It will be a 10 foot side yard setback. 25 foot front is correct . Rick: And then I also see from the Homeowner' s Association that they have approved 6 which is this lot and then 12 that is another issue . Fallin: There were two actions taken by the homeowners . One was this applicant submitted his plans to the Homeowner' s Association and he also submitted to the Homeowner' s Architectural Review Board to get the variance approval to see if the subdivision would allow him to do this or what they wanted him to do. This has been going on a long time and they decided that they would allow him to do that if the ownership voted favorably. They went through that process and the letter that is attached to this application says that they put it out to all of the owners and it did pass . And they took it through the Architectural Review and the variance was granted to do what they wanted to do. And now we are coming to you to see if we can get the variance granted for that front yard setback. Remo: When I looked at that I said "Well where else can they put it?" And to me it seems like the obvious choice that there is a lot of land on the other side of the building to put this garage BAM11 . 3 . 94 where you would meet all setback requirements and meet the standards of the homeowners as well as the City. Why isn' t it there? Fallin: This is where the Homeowner' s Association wanted the garage . Remo : I thought you said that you proposed this to them and that they granted the variance to put there . Fallin: This has been an ongoing situation between the owner and the homeowners in that area. There are several people around whose view comes directly across this . So they had a lot of meetings on- -he wanted to add a garage someplace and the result was this is where everybody seemed to feel comfortable that a garage could go and meet everybody' s requirements . At that point he agreed to that . Then he had to go through the Homeowner' s Association approval process because you are encroaching into our setbacks as well as the City. And then you have to get the Design Review Committee approval for the structure on the house which they have other considerations under covenants . Remo: This other area was never considered? Or was considered and rejected? Fallin: Apparently that is right . Yes . Remo : When the Board of Adjustment looks at this we look at it in terms of is it possible for him to put a garage on the property. So we are not too concerned about the homeowners and where they want it . We want to know whether you can put a garage in and where you can put it . We are not depriving you of putting in a garage . Fallin: If you didn' t allow this they couldn' t have a garage . Remo : According to the City, he can. Fallin: It is one of those catch 22s . So that is why we are here . We have this dilemma with-- Remo : I went and looked at the property and you could bury it there . It would look great . I can' t see any problems . Access is on the flat . I don' t even know where the access would be . Almost at the top of that incline that would have to make a turn on your garage . Fallin: All of the utilities come through that area right there . So that is one of the practical difficulties of the project in 2 BAM11 . 3 . 94 addition to the fact that nobody wants it at that end of the house . That is our problem. We can' t get it approved and get a building built over there . Rick: We can' t look at aesthetics . And it would be just crazy to put a garage on the south side of this house and interrupt the views and windows that are now enjoying that great view. But there is certainly room to put one in there and certainly by right within the homeowner' s Association rules and regs that they couldn' t prevent him from putting a garage there . If we denied him and he had to go put it over there he would have to go back and get the approval from the Homeowner' s Association. Ron: For architectural review purposes only. Remo: That would be the only thing because you have met their criteria for their own setback. Fallin: The owner of this house has met with the adjacent property owners saying "I would like to build a garage" . And he has got all of this lower level on the south end of the house for bedrooms right now. Everybody looks across this property that is below and on this street on the other side . There are two houses over here that would object to anything being built and one gentleman that lives down on Lot #7 or #8 that is very strongly concerned about what happens on this lot because of his view corridor. As a result of the informal meetings that he had with the property owners to see where a garage would be acceptable to everybody, this is the end of the house that they would prefer to see it because of the topography and the mass of the house and it is lower than anything else . Anything on this end is getting into viewplanes . Remo : Really? It has got a high bank, as I remember it, on the south side . As you go in the driveway it looks like to me at least a 4 foot platform that goes down into the basement of the house . Then there is another one that is even higher than that . Fallin: All I am saying is that is the result of all their meetings . Nobody wanted that open space filled. Remo : What I am saying is that it wouldn' t be filled so much if you take the amount of dirt that is there and lowered it a little bit more . You would probably come up with maybe 2 or 3 feet above the existing grade right now of that lawn area. And then I don' t exactly know where the property goes but if it is up against the higher berm it would seem to me like anyone else south of your property wouldn' t see it at all . 3 BAM11 . 3 . 94 Fallin: If anybody objects, apparently, in the subdivision as part of the covenants then they can' t approve anything until they get surrounding neighbors to approve it . That is the problem. Remo: So even if you met the requirements of their setbacks? Fallin: I still have to go through architectural review. Remo : But they don' t require a certain percentage of the total homeowners to-- Fallin: Once you have made application to the architectural review committee for a project they notify the ownership within the subdivision that this project is going before the board and are there any objections . If there are no objections it goes through pretty quickly. If somebody objects to it--and it only takes one person apparently to object--it is not automatic . So if any surrounding people have objections to the mass or location or light or whatever in their covenants-- Remo : It would still have to come back to a vote of the entire Homeowner' s Association. Rick: I think what Remo is leading up to here is that we would probably feel more comfortable had the homeowners denied a garage going within the allowed setbacks . Remo : I don' t know if it has been explored. Nobody ever told us any differently. All I know from the City' s standpoint and for under our guidelines if there is a place that they can put a garage in then they don' t have a hardship. They may have a hardship within the covenants of their homeowner' s association but when the City looks at this they look at it in an entirely different way. And from my standpoint when I saw that I said "He can put a garage right here" . Rick: Would you be more favorable to granting this variance if he had those denials? Remo: No. Because it is their own vested interest that they are concerned about--not necessarily the City' s . I would listen to what their arguments were . And they may have some validity within the purview of our guidelines . That would be fine . But just because they voted that they wouldn' t allow it for whatever reason- -for aesthetic reasons or for other consideration that we don' t consider then I would deny it . They would have to be valid according to our guidelines . 4 BAM11 . 3 . 94 Drueding: I was not aware of the homeowner' s covenants . You have some good points there, Remo. I look at it differently now. Concerning ADUs : The City is trying to work with the homeowners . If the homeowners don' t want ADUs the City basically wants to know that so they don' t encourage people to do ADUs in their area. So the City itself is trying to be more sensitive to homeowners . Fallin: This seems rather curious that if you have a majority of the adjacent property owners that are being affected by the action, what is the City' s interest? The City' s interest typically is for the public benefit and whether the public benefit is truly in the greater majority of for instance a cul-de-sac and the adjacent property and the entire subdivision has voted on it, it would seem to me that the City' s interest is certainly at heart to take those into consideration for how you approach this particular project . Remo: The whole thing is that when someone else comes to us with the same reasons and they say "Well, why did you give them this? They could have put it elsewhere and you granted them the variance . Why don' t you grant us the variance? " I think we have to be consistent as far as our guidelines say that if you have a unique situation that would cause you undue hardship or practical difficulty, if you were to adhere to the strict code . That is what we are here for is to grant you relief from that . That has to be topography, an erroneous survey--something beyond your control . But if we can see where you can actually do something on your property it is almost like we can' t concern ourselves with the Homeowner' s Association to that extent . We would have other cases that will be presented to us for the same reason and yet everyone in that zone or that vicinity has to adhere to the code . Fallin: That is the reason you have a variance process . When you come up against something that people would prefer another way of doing it the variance process is to allow the potential at least for consideration. Remo: It is not another way of doing it . It is that if it would cause the applicant or the homeowner undue hardship or a practical difficulty. And we have heard every unique situation that occur where the property owner really has a problem. And I don' t personally see a problem with this particular site . Fallin: If the subdivision denies him approval to build the garage within the envelope any other place within his setback area for the subdivision, and there would not be physically enough room on this particular corner to block that off and still get a garage door, maybe he can do that . I haven' t looked at that . So effectively 5 BAM11 . 3 . 94 he is denied even building a garage if the homeowners won' t let him do it where you want him to do it . Remo: Well, we are letting him do it . We are not letting him do it where he wants to do it . But we are letting him do it . We are saying "Put a garage here" . Fallin: So the practical difficulty then is that he is up against a rock and a hard place . You guys are saying "Well, you can build anyplace you want to build as long as you are within the setbacks . We don' t have any problem. It is not our problem. " And the Homeowner' s Association say "We won' t give you approval" . Remo : Well, we haven ' t heard any arguments as to why it can ' t be built there . Except for the one you propose about a viewplane . I can' t see that this is going to affect the viewplane at all because there is a bigger berm on the other side above them. Fallin: The people across the street . Remo: What, the gray house? Fallin: Sandy Johnson' s house which is the first one as you come up the hill on the right . Remo : I don' t see how they could be affected. Fallin: So those are the people who have strenuously objected to any kind-- Remo : But have you proposed to them how high it would be? Or how if you could sink the garage? Fallin: Apparently, he has . Remo : Have architectural drawings been presented? We don' t know any of this first of all . Remo then closed the public portion of the meeting. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Rick: To be honest with you, Dick, I was prepared to move favorably on this when I came in here . But Remo in his imitable fashion has turned me around. I have to agree with him on this . There is another place to put a garage in. It is not something that is of right . No one has a right to a garage . And I am going to have to probably go backwards on this one now. 6 BAM11 . 3 . 94 Ron: I would agree with Rick. I think that any problem with the adjacent homeowner is a problem within the Homeowner' s Association and is not to be considered by this group. As you said in your imitable way, there are plenty places to put a garage on this lot . It may not be the one preferred by the adjacent homeowners . But it is certainly one permitted by law and by right under the code of the City of Aspen. So I would not grant this variance . David: Like Rick I was prepared to just go ahead and say it doesn' t look like it is an overly large problem to settle . But since there is room n the other side and we haven' t seen that they would turn it down if this was the only choice and if it can be built lower below the berm, maybe they will go for it . So I am going to side with Rick. Jim: Like Rick, I was prepared to grant a variance . It seems like a minimal variance . And I still think it is a minimal variance . And I won ' t agree with you guys on this one . I think it is minimal . I think we have to act responsively and I think responsibility is the fact that if all the adjacent members in an association approve of it, I think they ought to have a say in it . I think that they have had a say in it . And I think it is within reason. I think it is a minimal variance myself . I don' t see it as being a big deal . David: I don' t disagree with that at all . Remo : It is the idea that they have options . Jim: They can do it some other way. If you wanted to get down to the real facts of everything on this committee--hardships and practical difficulty. I don' t know why anybody even comes to this board. Rick: When this guy bought this house there was no hardship. The hardship is created by the applicant wanting a garage . Jim: And you are right . It is not his right to have a garage . It is not a God given right to have a garage . But I am still going to stand on the fact that I think it is a minimal variance . I am prepared to accept that . Remo : My point is already part of the record. MOTION Ron: I make a motion to approve this variance . Rick seconded the motion. 7 BAM11 . 3 . 94 ROLL CALL VOTE: David, no, Jim, yes, Rick, no, Ron, no, Remo, no. Variance denied. MINUTES SEPTEMBER 1, 1994 Ron: I make a motion to approve minutes of September 1, 1994 . Rick seconded the motion with all in favor. Meeting was adjourned. Time was 5 : 55 P.M. Janice Carney, City D ty Clerk 8