HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.CU.700 W Francis St.A50-92 h'
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 6/17/92 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: 2735- 124 -08 -002 A50 -92
STAFF MEMBER: LL
PROJECT NAME: McPherson Accessory Dwelling Unit
Project Address: 700 W. Francis, Aspen. CO 81611
Legal Address: Lots R &S. Block 15
APPLICANT: Doug & Susan McPherson 923 -5120
Applicant Address: Box 4412. Aspen, CO 81612 925 -7000
REPRESENTATIVE: None
Representative Address /Phone:
Aspen, CO 81611
FEES: PLANNING $ none # APPS RECEIVED 3
ENGINEER $ # PLATS RECEIVED 3
HOUSING $
ENV. HEALTH $
TOTAL $ none
PAID:(YES) NO AMOUNT: $ -0- NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED 3/3
TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: X 2 STEP:
P &Z Meeting Date q/ 9 1 PUBLIC HEARINCLiES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
Planning Director Approval: Paid:
Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date:
REFERRALS:
City Attorney Mtn Bell School District
City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn NatGas
— 7 Housing Dir. Holy Cross State HwyDept(GW)
Aspen Water Fire Marshall State HwyDept(GJ)
City Electric Bldg Inspector
Envir.Hlth. Roaring Fork Other
Aspen Con.S.D . Energy Center Clean Air Board
DATE REFERRED: 6// I INITIALS:
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: b (ZY7Z INITIAL:
City Atty _ City Engineer Zoning _Env. Health
Housing ther:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR
CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF THE DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
LOCATED AT 700 WEST FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN COLORADO
Resolution No. 93- 5
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
meeting July 21, 1992; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5 -508 a detached accessory
dwelling unit is a conditional use review requiring a public
hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning staff recommended approval of the
detached accessory dwelling unit with conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed the conditional use and found
„ the proposal consistent with the goals of the City of Aspen to
1 integrate affordable housing within the neighborhoods and to
encourage the Historic Preservation Committee to approve the unit
as a dwelling units.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it does
hereby approve the conditional use for a 300 -310 square foot
detached accessory dwelling unit located at 700 West Francis Street
with the following conditions prior to the issuance of any building
permits:
1. The applicant shall submit the appropriate deed restriction
to the Housing Authority for approval. The deed restriction shall
state that the accessory unit meets the housing guidelines for such
units, meets the definition of Resident Occupied Unit, and if
rented, shall be rented for periods of six months or longer. Upon
approval by the Housing Authority, the applicant shall record the
deed restrictions with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's
l office.
2. The recorded book and page number shall be filed with the
Housing Authority prior issuance of any building permits.
j
3. A copy of the recorded deed restriction for the accessory
dwelling unit must be forwarded to the Planning Office.
4. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement
districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing
improvements in the public right -of -way.
5. The Zoning Officer shall confirm net liveable calculations.
6. The Historic Preservation Committee shall review and approve
the detached accessory dwelling unit. The unit shall exceed 300
square feet net liveable.
7. All representations that are made in the application and those
reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission shall
• be complied with.
APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on July 21,
1993.
Attest: Planning o��ommission:
Jan Carney, Deputy City Clerk -'
l /il� F/l ec6 E/Zk � C• - chwh fledtei✓
1 St eCC ,
tl
4 t )- -4 � T �,
V (J we 1 MEMORANDUM
Z\,` . TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning
RE: McPherson Conditional Use Review for a Detached Accessory
Dwelling Unit
DATE: July 21, 1992
SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to replace a dilapidated shed
located on the rear of the property providing an approximately 306
square foot (net liveable), accessory dwelling unit. Staff
recommends approval of conditional use for a detached accessory
dwelling unit.
* ,, • \.APPLICANT: Doug and Susan McPherson
( OttLOCATION: 700 West Francis, Aspen
G� 'k.) ZONING: R -6
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: To provide a detached studio accessory
dwelling unit.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
Rousing - Having reviewed the application the Housing Authority
has the following comments:
1. Prior to the issuance of any building permit a signed and
recorded Deed Restriction must be completed. The Housing Office
must have the recorded book and page number.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Conditional Use Review - Pursuant to Section 7 -304 the criteria
for a conditional use review are as follows:
A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals,
objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan,
and with the intent of the Zone District in which it is
proposed to be located; and
RESPONSE: The proposed accessory dwelling unit will be
approximately 306 square feet. The dwelling unit is proposed to
replace a shed that will be torn down. The demolition and
replacement of the shed have been reviewed and approved by the
Historic Preservation Committee. The applicant will comply with
the Housing Guidelines and deed restrict the unit as a resident
occupied unit for residents of Pitkin County. Replacement of the
shed as an a detached accessory dwelling unit is consistent with
t.
the goals of the Cottage Infill program.
B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the
character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed
for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the
mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and
RESPONSE: The detached unit will maintain the Victorian
architectural character of the landmark designated main house and
will create appropriate "alley scape" on the alley behind the main
house.
C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of
the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects,
including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular
circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise,
vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and
RESPONSE: The accessory dwelling unit will have no adverse effect
upon surrounding properties. The accessory dwelling unit is
located on the alley and the easterly lot line away from the
surrounding houses.
D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve
the conditional use including but not limited to roads,
potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protec-
tion, emergency medical services, hospital and medical
services, drainage systems, and schools; and
RESPONSE: No new services are required to redevelop the site.
E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet
the incremental need for increased employees generated by the
conditional use; and
RESPONSE: The proposal is a studio accessory dwelling unit for
employees of Pitkin County. An increase in employees is not
expected by the provision of an accessory dwelling unit.
F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional
standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan
and by all other applicable requirements of this chapter.
RESPONSE: The conditional use meets the requirements of the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan, Historic Preservation goals to retain
small outbuildings on the alley and other requirements of this
chapter. However, the design of the accessory dwelling unit that
was submitted with this application is not consistent with the HPC
approval. The submitted application for the accessory dwelling
unit is different from the original HPC application. Thus, the
accessory dwelling unit must receive HPC approval for the changes
2
before the issuance of any building permits.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
for the 306 square foot net liveable detached accessory dwelling
unit with the following conditions prior to the issuance of any
building permits:
1. The applicant shall submit the appropriate deed restriction
to the Housing Authority for approval. The deed restriction shall
state that the accessory unit meets the housing guidelines for such
units, meets the definition of Resident Occupied Unit, and if
rented, shall be rented for periods of six months or longer. Upon
approval by the Housing Authority, the applicant shall record the
deed restrictions with the Pitkin County Clerk, and Recorder's
office.
2. The recorded book and page number shall be filed with the
Housing Authority prior issuance of any building permits.
3. A copy of the recorded deed restriction for the accessory
dwelling unit must be forwarded to the Planning Office.
4. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement
districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing
improvements in the public right -of -way.
5. The Zoning Officer shall confirm net liveable calculations.
6. The Historic Preservation Committee shall review and approve
the detached accessory dwelling unit. The unit shall exceed 300
square feet net liveable.
7. All representations that are made in the application and those
reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission shall
be complied with.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve the conditional use for a
j. 346-square foot, net liveable, detached accessory dwelling unit at
31C 700 West Francis with conditions 1 -7 finding that the proposal is
consistent with the goals of the City of Aspen to integrate
affordable housing within the neighborhoods
ATTACHMENTS: Site Plan
3
.6 11!0 v ; NVIUOLJ►n �; : � I i
= w G- - G `► � s,aaanrnds °i - �a '
L. 1917`;,8, � _ --- o -
,.. �. i
11 1 1 • �•
I W_
,,
t i 1::111'11 ritt -- I - I ' I
I li ' :Iii Id II I' :I I iilll � I 1 z
Iiii 1 - 1 °
N m _ I L �
❑ - - __
ol
J
w
i �� ilih i�'' _ i ;! iii i[I I IIIIP ; 1' i! At H-.1 1
11 ����III�`� 1 rI II o i i I ��,
740 ■� >
• I,1 OIVIH 1 ll � � y1 i ii
1l l lit ;II it ; -
1€ 1 1N _ , - . 1;11 ' C �--=- I 1
!I I Z I, 1 1.!,.,!'
l l. I
1111 1 I ! i � I II I I I � 1 11 1
I�,���I�t i� , I ,III. .f NIB , i ii
-
� ' I -; I 1 i I i
�I Ii
\Ii
i -k-
I�
I.
II� II__VII �<f" s' ?13QI\[(JVS �� aril . 111 I
L IV(7.R��{tl IIacn I I I
; eil:
•
‘7 , ell
� m ar
--TT _
. -- •
I
1
1 ...
i w , .4 N
• F
Q /� x
'CR F N
O a .- `
N El /
1
0 .
V u I
1 r n
•
Wm n , rc (1
t - f
R,;
h . 9 LJJ Z AV) l u "
er V i ct i . Q
`4,T :: 'M E w ,•I 't q` i
/ m 1 wo e . o
Iii " P '1= 3 _ Y W p %,2 F. ii _ :et ., " S - , , ` !l
_I.
111 _
l,:
Lr1:IN.1.. 410 11
0
In
Lan n.
r n_ '^
i .. .... ... �,
d I n ^ / 9. ° p a pl
r .1
61 -
e ' ` I , 44 r. 1 f
1,," I n � \ 001_ � a ,' W
in cc
R t—
.0 0 f a co
it d Fir I rc r J v. xi
1 . VI I
^ , l { r 1 J . :i
g
✓ s ____�� —_ICI ' __ � 1 I w
n / c° il
..J u / - —" F oa 4, 3 occ.. x . — - -" I zi
l.. I I
I CI i
. ;;;
`►■ 0 d i aaaNnvs ; ► 4 °°
= _
.L ► UUP i. ■ a. 4. Y 0`00:
4
t I d
^:0. 1''a
1 a d IC a '9/ bi - --1 .,::
o -�
a R8
b i
it
ft
.
nn, Z
Z
.a
I 4
2
o
Li --11 Is)
2
.
C)
r
1 CO
I
ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 920 -5090 FAX# (303) 920 -5197
June 30, 1992
Doug & Susan McPherson
P. 0. Box 4412
Aspen, CO 81612
Re: McPherson Conditional Use Review
Case A50 -92
Dear Doug & Susan,
The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the
captioned application. We have determined that this application
is complete.
We have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing
by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, July 21,
1991 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. Should this date be
inconvenient for you please contact me within 3 working days of the
date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered
final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application
will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems.
The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that
a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at
the Planning Office.
Please note that it is your responsibility to mailing notice to
property owners within 300' and to post the subject property with
a sign. Please submit a photograph of the posted sign as proof of
posting and an affidavit as proof of mailing prior to the hearing.
If you have any questions, please call Leslie Lamont the planner
assigned to your case.
Sincerely,
Deborah Skehan,
Office Manager
W.
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: MCPHERSON CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNIT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, July 21, 1992 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the
Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd floor Meeting Room, 130
South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado to consider an application
submitted by Doug & Susan McPherson requesting approval of a
conditional use review for a detached accessory dwelling unit to
replace an existing shed located at 700 West Francis Street, Lots
R & S, Block 15; City and Townsite of Aspen. For further
information, contact Leslie Lamont at the Aspen/ Pitkin Planning
Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 920 -5090.
s /Jasmine Tygre, Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
1
ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone 920 -5090 FAX 920 -5197
MEMORANDUM
TO: Housing Director
FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
RE: McPherson Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit
700 W. Francis St.
Aspen, CO
DATE: June 19, 1992
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Doug &
Susan McPherson requesting approval of a Conditional Use review.
Please return your comments to me no later than July 3, 1992. Thank you.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kcim- -J - ehnson, City Planner gh
FROM: Tom Baker, APCHA Executive Director
DATE: July 1, 1992
RE: McPHERSON CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNIT; 700 WEST FRANCIS STREET
After reviewing the above - referenced application, the Housing
Office approves the proposed pursuant to the calculations for the
net liveable space for the proposed unit (submitted by Gretchen
Greenwood & Associates) which shows a total square footage of
306.1. and pursuant to Chapter 24, Section 5 -510, of the City of
Aspen Municipal Code:
Accessory dwelling units shall contain not less than three hundred (300) square feet of
allowable floor area and not more than seven hundred (700) square feet of allowable floor area.
The unit shall be deed restricted, meeting the housing authority's guidelines for resident
occupied units and shall be Limited to rental periods of not Less than six (6) months in
duration. Owners of the principal residence shall have the right to place a qualified employee
or employees of his or her choosing in the accessory dwelling unit.
The floor area requirement is for net liveable square feet as
defined by the Housing Office below:
Net Liveable Square Footage is calculated on interior Living area and is measured interior wall
to interior wall, including all interior partitions including, but not limited to, habitable
basements and interior storage areas, closets and laundry area. Exclusions include, but are
not limited to, uninhabitable basements, mechanical areas, exterior storage, stairwells,
garages (either attached or detached), patios, decks and porches.
Prior to building permit approval, a signed and recorded Deed
Restriction must be completed. This process could take from three
to four days. The Housing Office must have the recorded book and
page number prior to building permit approval.
\word \work \mcpher.ref
ACCESS022Y DWELLING UNIT DEED RESTRICTION
APPROVED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE 60 (COTTAGE INFILL),
ORDINANCE ONE (HOUSING REPLACEMENT PROGRAM), AND
SECTION 5 -510 OF THE ASPEN CITY LAND USE CODE,
AND RESOLUTION #
THIS ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT DEED RESTRICTION is made and
entered into this day of , 19_, by
(Owner) , ( "Coventor ") for itself, its successors and
assigns, for the benefit of the City of Aspen, Colorado, a
municipal corporation, and the Aspen / Pitkin County Housing
Authority, a multi - jurisdictional housing authority established
pursuant to the AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
recorded in Book 605 at Page 751 of the records of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder's Office ( "Authority ").
WHEREAS, Coventor owns that parcel of real property located at
(Physical Address) , in the City of Aspen, County of
Pitkin, Colorado, more specifically described as Exhibit "A"
attached to and incorporated herein upon which is situate a
(Description of Free Market Dwelling) to contain an (Attached,
Detached, or Contained Within) a net liveable square foot
(Description of unit; i.e., studio, one bedroom, etc.) accessory
dwelling unit ( "Unit "); and
WHEREAS, Coventor agrees to accept and impose certain
conditions on its use and occupancy of the Unit as an accessory
dwelling unit under the Aspen Municipal Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and
obligations contained where, the Coventor hereby covenants and
agrees as follows:
1. The Unit as identified hereinabove shall not be
condominiumized and, if rented, shall be rented only in
accordance with the guidelines as adopted and as may be
amended from time to time by the Authority governing
"resident- occupied" dwelling units.
2. Coventor need not rent the Unit; however, when rented, only
qualified residents, as defined in the Housing Guidelines,
shall reside therein and all rental terms shall be fore a
period of not less than six (6) consecutive months. Coventor
shall maintain the right to select the qualified resident of
its own choosing when renting the Unit. An executed copy of
all leases for the Unit shall be submitted to the Authority
within ten (10) days of the approval of a qualified resident.
3. The covenants and limitations of this deed restriction shall
run with and be binding on the land for the benefit of the
City of Aspen and the Authority, either of whom may enforce
the provisions thereof through any proceedings at law or in
equity, including eviction of non - complying tenants.
4. It is understood and agreed by the Coventor that no waiver of
a breach of any term or condition as contained in this deed
restriction shall be construed to be a waiver of any breach of
the same or other term or condition, nor shall failure to
enforce any one of the terms or conditions, either by
forfeiture or otherwise, be construed as a waiver of any term
or condition.
IN WITNESS HEREOF, Coventor has placed its duly authorized
signature hereto on the date as described above.
COVENTOR:
By:
(Name of Coventor)
Mailing Address:
STATE OF
ss.
COUNTY
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _
day of , 19, by (Name of Coventor)
WITNESS MY hand and official seal.
My Commission expires:
Date
Notary Public
2
ACCEPTANCE BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY
The foregoing agreement and its terms are accepted by the
Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority.
THE ASPEN /PITKIN COUNTY
HOUSING AUTHORITY
By:
James L. Curtis, Chairman
Mailing Address:
50 Truscott Place
Aspen, CO 81611
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of , 19 by James L. Curtis.
WITNESS MY hand and official seal.
My Commission expires:
Date
Notary Public
\work \forms \ordl.dr
3
�I�:
jot GRETCHEN GREENWOOD & ASSOCIATES, INC.
alt 1111' ARCHITECTURE • INTERIOR DESIGN • PLANNING
MO Pi
GRETCHEN GREENWOOD & ASSOCIATES, INC.
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
.TO: G Ir1LIJY ,
FAX NUMBER: 6 1 ZO 7 5 0
PROJECT i � k r I ri
AGES TO BE TRANSMITTED (INCLUDING COVER PAGE)
MESSAGE: G i• I p I
Liiac • of car t
o
On 4 2,
TRANSMITTED BY: 1014\1-- : 30 6 14- I
rtre,„4\ D. if you kkviat.
•
201 N. MILL, 5TE. 207 • ASPEN, CO 61511 • TEL: 006,925.4502 • FAX, 707.9254090
I
: •
•
'r
� .
� URL!C NOTICc f .1 r
a VAN! _ . 1 DATE .,
c TIME ''
- . (3' PLACE'.''' -. �
.� - PURPOSE __, r
,..SSA ! .2.+._ r- • __ _ j
' s �
rte` —..-- 4 , '
f`-' '4
�• • 1
VG ,
, - P UBLIC- NOTICE • - _ _ � 5 -
} L DATE -_ -i - - P
1' -
". _ TIME ' -a..- ; .
• ` t' PLACE
a — l' '!' �. --- - cam-
. iPURPO ' ',,. F • F`
' -- - • .. .I
9 r1;
-1.r 07, -'� • . _ , R..NC■ S_z* .PE 7.4 . •
.+` 1 s F— kti�ia��T • • e i
,:.,44; 1 t . 1 / -..-
t .
1 - Y
2 j r °I : rl` x 4 i ._ t i
Y ' , F u 4 `
c L". .d..- r . fi r t!l k �A '
L
JULft,
July 7, 1992
Aspen /Pitkin County Planning Dept.
Aspen, Colorado
Attn: Leslie Lamont
RE: McPherson Conditional Use Review
Case A50 -92
Dear Leslie:
I mailed notice to all property owners within 300 feet of subject property
on July 6, 1992 and I posted the property on July 3, 1992.
I have attached the following information:
1. Picture of posted sign.
2. Mailing list and notice enclosed.
Sincerely,
f Po
Dou;'I. s McPherson
Susan McPherson
on
DJM /jh
Enclosures
•
-° 1 21 •
}•
/ Parcel #2735- 124 --08 -002 /Pare( #2735- 124- o8 -.1.)1
McPherson, Douglas J. Su
P.O. Box 4412 Sugar teNort D.
828 n t North 16 Street
Aspen, CO 81612
Aspen GO 81611
✓ Parcel #2735 -124 -0 -003 ✓ Parce' E 124- o8 -0.)4
Bellina, Joseph A. Tharp. Ueather H.
1 Galleria Blvd. # 10 P.O. ?nx 1293
Metairie, LA 70001 Aspen i0 81612
Parcel #2735 -124 -0 005 /Farce M2735- 124- 08 -0)6
Saunders, Robert Albert Gary
7206 Lancet Lane 725 W 'smuggler
'. Oklahoma City, OK 131,20 Aspen c0 84611
A Parcel #2735 - 124 -o 007 O!
1�arce. g2735-124-09-001
7 Miller, Ann F. Marol Stephen
715 W. Smuggler P.O. 1, 82
Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81612
"Parcel #2735-124-0 /Parcel #2735- 124 -09 -003
Kalmes, Francis W. 609 Corporatior
627 W. Smuggler P.O. Box 1819
Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 816:'
Parcel #2735- 124• -09 -004 /Parcel #2735 -12;-- 09.005
Hall, Charles L. Ritchie, Robert Dougl:Is
.P.O. Box 1819 701 W. Francis ;trees
Aspen, CO 81612 Aspen, CO 81611
,j /Parcel # 2735- 124 -01- 008 /Parcel #2735 - 124- 09 -0'1
Jones, Vivienne Estelle Scales, Helen R.
P.O. Box 317 626 W. Francis Street
Aspen, CO 81622 Aspen, CO 81611
.. "Parcel #2735- 124 -09 -012 / .
y,. "Parcel #2735 - 124 2F 0 )1
• Smith, Christopher H. Turner, Wave
P.O, Box 130 P.O. Box 973
! Snowmass, CO 81654 Aspen, CO 81612
t. VParcel #2735 - 124 --26 -003. Parcel #2735- 124 -2@. 4
j Thorpe, John E. V McCausland, Linda
. , 615 W. Francis Street P,O. Box 1584
•.�r Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81612
•
P. •
J p
r
•
'ry Parcel #2735 - 124 -'2( -005 "Farce #2735- :24 -27 04
Austin, Anne J. Ritchie, Robert D.
*,'V601 W. Francis Street 701 W. Franc Stre
Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen. CO 81(11
t Parcel #2735 - 124 - 2% 009 de Parce' #2735- '24 -2 10
1 �, Pettus, James Milan II Keelty. Patrick J.
r- 1236 N. Crescent Nc fight• :vd. 729 W Franc!! Stre•
'Los Angeles, CA 9(052 Aspen. CO 81111
t
6 ,
_
1
i
N lit
y i ..
,
y�.
r'
tyr
3,.1-
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: MCPHERSON CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNIT
NOTICE I8 HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, July 21, 1992 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the
Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd floor Meeting Room, 130
South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado to consider an application
submitted by Doug & Susan McPherson requesting approval of a
conditional use review for a detached accessory dwelling unit to
replace an existing shed located at 700 West Francis Street, Lots
R & S, Block 15, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further
information, contact Leslie Lamont at the Aspen/ Pitkin Planning
Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 920 -5090.
s /Jasmine Tycre, Chairman
Planning and zoning Commission
� -. (� AND USE APPPLICATION rum(
(�
HOUSE
1) Project Name Ci6�ts� ( f ° R 6
'.fI 6 H OUSE
2) Project Location 7O& ' F'P rvC I S QSPF N 1 Co ,
Le+» -R 4S a cdc- (S
(indicate street edits', lot & block number, legal description where - -
approp» -
3) Present Zoning
R ^b 4 Loot size (ooOb SQoA -RE Pest
5) Applicant's Name, Address & Phone & L >° b S. - S USR P•S PLC P . R Q p j
et* 4. - Wad.) ( c0 06 12 R2S 7oto) R 2 3S ( 2 0
6) Representative's Name, Address & Phone 8
7) Type of Application (plea• check all that apply) :
Conditional Use Conceptual SPA — Conceptual Historic Dev-
Special Review _ Final SPA Final Historic Dev-
_ 8040 cceenline _ Concep WO — Minor Historic Dev_
Final PUD
Stream Margin Final Demolition --
Maintain view Plane Subdivision - — Historic Designation
Conclajniumii Tati -on' P
Amendment - G•ZS Allotment
Lot Split/lot Lane - - _ Qty Emeuption Adjustment
E Description of Existing isti Uses - (amber and type of existirg structures;
appro3cimate sq. ft_ umber mber of bedrooms; any previous approvals granted to the
ProLt-Y) -
T1klS cp CiR6C RouSE Lou-L e,a A r■6 U StRUCki) F- � LOHtCK_
RePUcrc_ES Ara ct-2 ONStPte L-E C3Pt2DS • As6Gry K'F G
APPeouao
•
9) Description of Development Application
See_ A4fA cN -r-�tr2 Qs e fPVkkGriv PAWPt•GE
10) have you attached the following?
Y Respo tse to Attachment 2, Minim= 9 emission Contents
Le Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents
t Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application
A t' I6 V (A
•
0 ape&
ATTACHMENT 2
CONTENTS
1. Applicants name, address and telephone number.
2. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which
the development is proposed to occur.
3. Deed and ownership page of Title Policy of subject parcel.
4. 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating subject parcel within the
City of Aspen.
5. Written description of proposed development, a copy of the
Aspen H.P.C. final approval for subject parcel and model of
main house and carriage house.
1. Doug and Susan McPherson
P. 0. Box 4412
Aspen, Colorado 81612
925 -7000
923 -5120
2. McPherson main house and carriage house
700 W. Francis Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lots R & S
Block 15
113346 2 07 /17 /71 15 :33 Rec $10,00 DK 651 PG 772
ir' Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc $40.36
II to
�— RECORDING REQUESTED BY
O
4.1 AND WIZEN RECORDED MAIL TO
i ku
da l
ti
t
ga k— MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO
A •
1
(Space above this line for
11 recorder's use)
/1 ADMINISTRATOR WITH WILL ANNEXED'S DEED
II VP
TRUST SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC., as Administrator With
C 1. Will Annexed of the Estate of MARCIA S. GROVER, also known as
V
a
1 0 MARCIA S. WILLIAMS and MARCIA SHERMAN, deceased, Los Angeles
T County, California, Superior Court Case No. NCP 13556 G,
J Per- pursuant to the full authority granted to it under the
Independent Administration of Estates Act, California Probate
Code Section 10400 et seq., hereby conveys to DOUGLAS J.
L.
McPHERSON and SUSAN without any representation,
warranty, or covenant of any kind, express or implied, all
right, title, interest, and estate of the decedent at the
time of death and all right, title, and interest that the
estate may have subsequently acquired by operation of law or
otherwise in the real property situated in the County of
Pitkin, State of Colorado, legally described as follows:
1
PAGE 1 OF 2 PAGES Exhibit
43._ 62 07/17/91 15:33 Rec 711_ _'0 BK: 651 PG 773
Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $40.38
' LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 15, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
1 DATED: v u c.. y /.2_, /511 TRUST SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC.
„
�''0 R. C.;, ..
1 ' ,'
Vice. President . ... . ry t i p ; .Ki 1
I ,.•:?.• :: 1 u•in 1 ` O1 t, l •
BY: As st t Secretary. P 1 ,
1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
SS.
1 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
1 On \A1(/ /" , 1991, before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public of the State of California, personally appeared
1 M c /{, h. 7S/-con , Vice President of TRUST SERVICES
I OF AMERICA, INC., and rik/ �1un/ /s.i GA , Assistant
1 Secretary of TRUST SERVICES AMERICA, INC., personally known to me
1 (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory. evidence) to be the
persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and
1 acknowledged to me that each of them executed the same in his or
her authorized capacity, and that by their signatures on the
I instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf of which the
1 persons acted, executed the instrument.
11 WITNESS my hand and official seal.
a•:� OFFICIAL SEAL
6 OSCAR F. MENA
LIFORNIA CE IN =— — NGELES COUNTY
1 NOTARY PUBLIC -- CALIFORNIA O IUNE 1.1994
PAGE 2 OF 2 PAGES Exhibit
1
,.e
UlIW^
Oge S el ., .a0 :� -•
Il l ditlgea r Ile Co m po ^t 'b' the pb Y - t : f co
ompeleO le1b reas o{ mod
s When , er Y ina l i rovm on to o PPeol Irom ^ ^ a ge by ,. ,�_a
eme os re r2ed or P l ._ , , le Isuelion
del
„ „ litiaalion to linol deletm
S C H E D U L E A
OROL•'tt NO.: 00018457 POLICY NO.: 0 -9981 -75554
1 DATE OF POLICY: July 17, 1991 at 15:33 P.M.
AMOUNT OF INSURANCE: $ 403,750.00
•
1 1. NAME OF INSURED:
DOUGLAS J. MCPHERSON AND SUSAN L. MCPHERSON
2. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND WHICH IS COVERED BY THIS
1 POLICY IS:
Fee Simple
3. TITLE TO THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND IS VESTED 1N:
1 DOUGLAS J. MCPHERSON AND SUSAN L. MCPHERSON
4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN TIHIS POLICY IS IN THE STATE OF
1 COLORADO, COUNTY OF PITKIN, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Lots R AND 8,
Block 15,
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
1
Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc.
602 E. Hyman
1 Aspen, CO 81611
303 - 925 -3577
1
1
1
AUTf1O• ZED Exhibit
1 SIGNATURE
S4 'I' \V 4 T •1` T 1 �
5. The McPherson Carriage House will replace a dilapidated
shed located on the rear of the property. The shed was
probably moved onto the property in the 1930s or 1940s and
is not historic. The new carriage house will be smaller in
size and will maintain the proportions of the old shed. The
architectural character and exterior materials will resemble
the landmark designated main house.
/
. 1.
i 1 ,
C
■
+ - > .� ,
. ��p ,,� l', Ir I .
LL
11' II i If t i t II (t—^ � !'_ =r 5 � fl - ; \
t l44 \5 � � v0 -
4 �O o° i . ..
°, o
v:A0 ‘/ ri: Rap, ,T t ail (I pil : 0_ m 1 -=tP. At°
N ____ innin,m0; i, ,___ .e..„,...,... no on si_
_ . _. • 4„,p,„,} ...- i E-: 2 E .... gui =IT
\ . IL"
, \ / - �� ;_ 3?-: . - - _ MI i
i V . �� � -= OB E C 5a l r eaeae$ o \
ma Sac � vivo..
w _ no �y Sim -ems - - - ir e .. E_ 1 ' 6 " ;a: till - 911
QQ , , m
o P. /?/-Y i P 1t•�,?�� _
-._. • tar °I * 0 A-- El li --; r id - i mali
_
r =—r . �
i i ". - .. ......, A. 1F _ E
L _-- - 41 1l -, g e l , F: m
> a t a! -41 _ _
i \ x y
VI = —
�
s, , a ,.:.:
o - - - 4 ...
t ,....._...---- I` . ;..
;.,
• �I. �ef . 0- \ , // a i
• I� a
1
— — — — —
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
Minutes of April 8, 1992
Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Joe
Krabacher, Les Holst, Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer, Karen Day, Martha
Madsen and Linda Smisek present. Don was excused.
Martha did not vote.
MOTION: Roger made the motion to approve the minutes of March 18,
1992; second by Karen. All in favor, motion carries.
MOTION: Roger made the motion to approve the minutes of March 19,
1992; second by Karen. All in favor, motion carries.
FINAL DEVELOPMENT 700 W. FRANCIS
Roxanne Eflin presented the overview of the project as attached in
records.
Roxanne: The proposal is for an enlargement and partial demolition
onsite relocation and is asking for setback variations. You will
be looking at three sets of standards: Development Review
standards, Relocation Standards and the Partial Demolition
Standards. There were four conditions of conceptual approval and
I feel three were met. The condition that the applicant shall
restudy the design to show the delineation of old and new and
materials to be used needs to be addressed. In reviewing that I
feel the intent has not been met. Regarding the side yard setback
variation they have studied more about the trees and they are going
to be moving the addition further to the east 1 1/2 feet so the
total setback will be 2 1/2 feet. They are asking for a number of
variations. It will be a combined front and rear yard setback
variation plus a west side yard set back variation. The
outbuilding they are asking for a rear yard variation and an east
side yard setback. You have every combination of side yard setback
imaginable that they are asking variations for. The primary issue
for you all is the transition and now the new is being added to the
old. Standard one has not yet been met unless you find that the
transition has been accomplished. The rest that they are proposing
meets that standard because of compatibility, the materials, form,
scale etc. Standard #2 is fine and Standard #3 has been met in my
opinion except if you consider that an addition like this or
modification to a cottage of this nature will then make it
ineligible for register listing. If you consider that to be a
detraction from cultural value then you need to address that. #4
is about the architectural integrity and they are now proposing a
domed skylight that needs addressed. The partial demolition
standards are fine. The two issues of the relocation standards are
the financial guarantee which we are working on and will be a
requirement prior to the issuance of a Building Permit and working
out the relocation. We also will need a project monitor. The
partial demolition and relocation standards have been met with the
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of April 8, 1992
exception of the detailed relocation plan and financial security.
Applicant Presentation
Gretchen Greenwood: I will respond to the review standards. The
first one is compatibility with the design structure. In order to
do the addition along the back we are going to have to rebuild most
of the structure to the west and to the rear portion of the
property in order to preserve the existing trees. Any kind of
construction to this house could potentially disrupt the growth of
the trees. We intend to keep the house as far away from the trees
as possible. One tree will be relocated to the south of the
property. We will work with the Parks Dept. on tree location or
replacement. Two trees will be affected to the rear of the
property. Our landscape plan at this point is to the patio area.
It is only three feet below the grade and we are going to put a
planting bed that steps at 18 inches and then again at 18 inches.
There is a mild transition. We will rebuild the existing fence
and keep it in the same location. It is a little out of the
property line and we are not sure if you are concerned about that
or not.
Doug McPherson, owner: How do I keep our dog in because the fence
is not adequate?
Roxanne: The guidelines are very clear about fences and stockade
fences are allowed to the rear of the parcel. Fences to the front
of the parcel need to be open in nature if you choose to have a
fence in front.
Doug: We thought about doing a victorian metal fence and can I
make it to keep the dog in?
Roxanne: We need to see the fence design.
Gretchen: It is an unresolved issue and if we have to come in
again we can do so.
Doug: Lets solve it right now and if we do that kind of a fence
can we make it a little taller.
Gretchen: I propose to keep it like the other one.
Bill: We can go along with the fence presented and if the
applicant decides to make an amendment they can do so.
Gretchen: We will be using the sandstone around the planting bed
and using the sandstone pavers. The house will stay in the same
alignment but moved forward fen feet in order to accommodate for
2
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of April 6, 1992
the addition in the back. To show delineation between old and new
we have kept the existing roof line the same as the old roof line
so that we don't have an addition overwhelms the existing building.
We have chosen to keep the addition to the back quiet in detail.
The siding will be a different size we are going from a 4 1/2 to
a 5 1/2 siding. If we can, we will use some of the existing
siding. Windows will have simple fenestration. We want to
maintain a sandstone base because it keeps the bottom of the
building clean and it is a maintenance situation. To change the
roof pitch is a contrived situation because of the lines of the
house and the form of the building should be maintained. In the
stairwell is where we are making the transition between the
existing building and the new building. The new building has been
designed to be a split level to this existing building that allows
us to maintain this lower roof height. The skylight is needed
because it is dark and we have very low plate heights with the
mansard roof so there is not a lot of sun. There will be no
ornamentation but we will keep the shingles. The addition is
compatible in character with all the guidelines with massing, roof
pitches, etc. Because we haven't' decided to build over in this
location we have maintained 90% of the view that residents of Aspen
see, the east, west and south sides. On the partial demolition
standards we are doing a partial demolition on the back of the
house. Regarding relocation standards the house can be moved. We
will run two 12 by 14 eye beams north and south of the building and
six by six beams perpendicular to the eye beans. The four large
beams will be lifted up by a crane, moving the building three to
four feet above where it stands now. We will move it as far
forward as we can in order to do excavation then we will move it
back. The chimneys will be taken off and stockpiled and sandstone
will be removed at the same time the building is raised up. We
will be reusing the existing windows and glazing in the window and
the new windows are a totally new proportion and they are in the
application.
Susan McPherson: We are going to reverse the trim paint.
Gretchen: We have a basement that we are putting into the building
and we are required to use 200 sq. ft. of our FAR and we managed
that. We would like to add two windows for egress out of the
basement and we also want to add windows on the west side of the
window well basement area also. The windows are similar to the
ones at Ann Miller's house.
Gretchen: Basically we wouldn't see the skylight but you would see
the parapet.
Roger: What I suggested was if the trim was green and the house
was white, on the new, reverse that color.
3
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of April 8, 1992
Les: Will you have some metal grading over the window wells etc.?
Gretchen: A fence will be provided due to the way it steps down.
The window well will be very shallow, only six feet. It will be
three feet below grade.
Joe: To differentiate the old and new possibly the shingles could
play a part. With respect to the scale and detailing along the
roofline are those going to be the same width?
Gretchen: The old part of the building will be different than the
new part.
Joe: From the plans it looks the same.
Roger: Is there anyway to lower the skylight and not have the
siding, just the bubble part showing.
Gretchen: Yes that can be done.
Roger: You mentioned that the sandstone on the site is large and
it could be cut and used.
Doug McPherson, owner: We cut it down to face the cement block
because we are making a new foundation. We will still have to use
some new.
Roger: Do you have enough sandstone to face the original portions
of the house the south side and the east side?
Gretchen: Yes, we will face out with the original sandstone. And
possibly we can use new and old in the new portion of the house.
Roger: Are the windows placed per the code?
Gretchen: Yes, light and ventilation and egress.
Roger: Is it possible rather than have the double hung to have the
windows similar to the other two which is more similar to a
basement window and still allow egress.
Gretchen: It is possible to change those. The windows chosen
serve the needs of the client.
Roger: This house could be a landmark house; could it still be a
landmark with the addition proposed?
Roxanne: No, as this addition is large.
4
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of April 8, 1992
Linda: Will the dumb waiter from the kitchen to the existing
basement be lost with this addition or attempted to be retained or
used?
Susan: That room is not workable as a kitchen.
Roxanne: They are planning a complete demolition on the inside.
Gretchen: We are only removing one wall.
Roger: There was no comment about the building in the back.
Gretchen: It is still 12 by 20.
Roger: In general we need to discuss color changes on houses
depicting the old and new.
Roxanne: We dictate color of major materials, roofing, sandstone
and brick.
Roger: We aren't dictating color we are saying it has to be
different. What happens down the road when they say they don't
r want it different.
Roxanne: You can make that condition but it is a zoning issue.
Karen: Was there any discussion of making the siding look like a
barn?
Gretchen: We thought we would stay the same as the building with
the lap siding as the addition has, so it looks like it was built
at the same era.
Board Clarifications
Les stepped down.
Les: This is a wonderful victorian that we are loosing and I do
not feel you meet the development review standards 2 or 3 or the
relocation standards one and two. FAR is allowable but not
guaranteed. To me it will be a visual disaster, a personification
of all that has gone wrong in the west end and HPC is setting a
dangerous precedent to let this scale and mass go through on this
project and I wish you good luck with the project.
Jake: I feel the addition is quite large. I voted for conceptual
based on a restudy of that and we worked on that at the worksession
and I gave you my ideas. I am not convinced that it is working.
5
r.
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of April 8, 1992
Certain tools can be used to mitigate a large addition on a smaller
house such as the use of an architectural hyphen, change in
materials and details and use of a less prominent massing or
secondary massing. Making small variations and the exposure of the
shingles or siding and the thickness of the trim to me is not
strong enough to create the affect that is necessary. A clear
example is the Crocket house, you can tell what is old and what is
new and that is all I am looking for.
Gretchen: Blanket solutions are not always the correct way to go.
I have a problem when I hear it is too large, too large. We are
keeping the shed for the community, trees, east lawn, height etc.
This is a three bedroom house and one of the bedrooms is only 10
by 11.
Martha: I like' this project but I have trouble with the
encroachment and setback which I have stated before. I have some
concern with the detail.
Linda: Is the neighbor to the west satisfied with the fact that
the house is 10 feet forward and possibly she will loose the
sunlight?
Gretchen: She is satisfied and we sat down with her and moved the
house over and worked the issues out.
e
Roger: We should ask that the paint be reversed as a possibility.
The original sandstone should only be placed on the original house
and the new sandstone would be different and placed on the new
portion. Also that the skylight be lowered so that you don't have
siding showing around it. As far as the setbacks go the only
problem was the neighbor and that seems to be solved.
Karen: I am in favor of the house and differentiating between the
old and new should be determined by the architect instead of HPC
making that decision for them.
Bill: I feel it is easy to tell the difference between the old and
new on these plans. As far as changing the color in this
particular case, they want to be sympathetic and use similar
detailing. I feel it would be odd to use two different colors.
It is always hard to add on to the small victorians and today's
family needs can not live in 1200 sq. ft.
Bill: Issues to be included in the motion are: Findings that the
side yard and rear yard variations are more compatible with the
historic structure. In order to save the trees on the east, a side
yard variation and to keep a more compatible out building and
garage structure on the alley. The skylight to be lowered. The
6
•
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of April 8, 1992
original sandstone left on the historic portion and the new
sandstone on the new. The financial security must be approved by
the City Attorney prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Detailed relocation plan. Combined front and rear yard setback.
Combined side yard setback and a west and east setback variation
and rear yard setback.
Roxanne: The trees are very important on this parcel and the Board
has to decide whether or not they want a statement in the motion
that if anything happens to the trees that they be replaced etc.
There are three trees that are going to be removed and a new one
added.
MOTION: Joe made the motion that HPC grant final development
approval for 700 W. Francis finding that the application has met
the development review standards; partial demolition standards;
relocation standards, and also finding that we should grant the
east side yard, west side yard, combined front and rear side yard,
and the combined east and west side yard variations finding that
the variations are more compatible in character with the historic
landmark, than would be development in accord with dimension
requirements of the code. Also we have the conditions that the
existing sandstone to the extent possible be used for the original
structure; that the new sandstone to the extent possible be used
for the new structure; that the applicant will preserve the
be
existing trees on the property and if any are damaged that they and
appropriately replaced. Financial security be posted
appropriate documents executed and approved by the City Attorney
and that there be a detailed relocation plan submitted to Staff and
monitor; second by Roger.
Discussion:
Joe: My concern on the skylight they were talking about 5'6" plate
heights and I am not sure how the skylight would affect that.
Gretchen said the skylight would be completely hidden behind the
parapet wall.
AMENDED MOTION: Joe amended the motion that the applicant have the
ability to lower the skylight or ensure that it is completely
hidden behind the parapet wall; second by Roger.
AMENDED MOTION: Joe amended the motion that HPC encourage to the
extent possible to differentiate the use of materials and detailing
between old and new; dies for lack of a second.
Motion and amended motion carries 5 -2.
VOTE: No, Jake and Linda
Yes, Bill, Roger, Martha, Joe, Karen
7
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of April 8, 1992
Don Erdman is monitor of project.
Bill Poss will be alternate monitor.
715 W. SMUGGLER - FINAL DEVELOPMENT
Roxanne: They are seeking a variation for the side yard setback
and the reduction of two parking spaces. Staff recommends final
development approval.
Gretchen Greenwood, architect: On the east side we are adding a
gazebo which has its own roofline. We are moving the original car
port in five feet as required by zoning and asking for an east side
yard setback in order to not disrupt the landscape and gardens.
The garage is as small as possible.
Joe: Do we need to have an extensive discussion of this proposal
since it is the same thing we saw at conceptual.
Roger: It is the same except for the two windows on the property
line.
Gretchen: The neighbors prefer the windows.
Karen: Why is the roof line the way it is on the garage?
Gretchen: It is a flat roof and we will provide a little detail
to match some of the detailing on the house.
Karen: Is there a way to do a carriage style door?
Gretchen: I feel the applicant would want an electric door but can
make the front look like a carriage door.
MOTION: Joe made the motion that the HPC grant Final Development
approval for 715 W. Francis finding that the proposal meets the
development review standards; granting the side yard and parking
variations finding that the variations are more compatible in
character to the historic resource that would be development in
accord with dimensional requirements. Also that the applicant
restudy the design of the garage doors to have a more carriage
feel; second by Roger. All in favor, motion carries.
LANDMARK DESIGNATION - 134 E. BLEEKER - PUBLIC HEARING
Jake and Bill stepped down.
Joe chaired.
8
ATTACHMENT 3
CONTENTS
A. Elevations and floor plans of the McPherson Carriage House.
ATTACHMENT 4
Review Standards: Development of Conditional Use
A. The McPherson Carriage House has been approved by The
Historic Preseration Committee and will:
1. Create a new detached accessory dwelling unit.
2. Provide long term affordable West End housing.
3. Help revitalize West End neighborhoods which
have become idle due to the predominance of
vacation and /or second home owners.
B. The McPherson Carriage House will maintain the Victorian
architectural character of the landmark designated main house
(see Exhibit A elevations of main house and carriage house)
and will create appropriate "alley scape" on the alley behind
the main house (see Exhibit B).
C. The McPherson Carriage House minimizes the possible
adverse effects of the conditional use by:
1. Being located on the alley and the easterly lot
line away from the surrounding houses.
2. Its small size (see Exhibit C) minimizes visual
impacts.
3. Required off street parking and trash facilities
have already been provided for the main house
and the carriage house. The location of the
carriage house screens the parking and trash
area from the street.
4. The Victorian design of the carriage house
compliments the main house and the
neighborhood.
D. All the public facilities and services are adequate to serve the
conditional use.
E. The McPherson Carriage House conditional use will not
generate any need for additional employees.
F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional
standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive
Plan and all other applicable requirements of this chapter.
0
MI 4
u 1 -- - .,,,d1111
II
= 11
yy IL
11 I
1
I II , I j I j itIIIIIIU I !' I 0111111 1 I I 1 11 ip 7 it ill
rJ
> I d 1i 1 11 ill IIII ( 1! II1II 1 It 111 I
L'�lilt!IIii j I I � ' I I "IUi lilll
n Il
C IL I 111" ,I
I IC I III Ilk � X11 ( I L .11 _ �I
1 II�illtIIIIIfI ; 1 1 1I I, ' 1
111 - t7Z rt � / �
. fl IJI - - /
� till rr?;
1!1 Ifll' ' i1 1 I
I'
1111I[ 11 hi) "1II11 t II ' 1 it
II 11 I I_
1_i i u � >It'
IT 0 1"P ( I iI
Ii I .. � I:ILllLe!
111!
ill I I! II
� i
Iii
I a r mo ,1 SAUNDERS i? `:ia '.�
=o ` �� o ' � VICTORIAN ' !!
0 7- - A ASPEN COLORADO -te � 41a
r9
X
Il It
I I HhIHhI
i
1 1 1 1 !1 ' 1 L 1 II [ I IIl -: _
11 ijAILI 1 I'II, 1
Ll I II 1
1, Li 1 lib •
1 9
I IJL _ i a p ■
:gin 1 z lli IUhI_�IIIIi II1II it
IF E.1
�L 1 I ,
1. I
m I, �l�l 1iiirillixiii?i
iI11,�1 RiIU II I
II I iy/ __ , '
O l ii . . 1I I 11 •, i �. II�!����� It'll ; I i
il ill_[ 1 .4��� :. - ;I L
Ell I 11�i1 1 • ;,�I
' i ,
III ��� � lI ili'.�� � I , iii
III Ir I!li
ll 1' I i ii,
�I�ii�^ ,I i.: �'�
nu 'Li
t P 41 � ,I 3'=,'C1 C1 .11 I � � ��m > m SAUNDER'S e;�fi�;� ��� `,
I I � < b
%ss .'-,o - . VICTORIAN 11.' i ,
6I€ I
° m
I ill
I ___ -c5
_
It x 11'50 .V 'E IVV Vo" \ /� \�V�
�. � r ., t'
x ,
aN a
s
Ali m: r
m > d � • f e
0) I i T 4_ - I _ m ��'. r- .o
0
i • . y b /. o i . -� � r a.r_ o _. x N
A w m„ -, I p
tn
U �,., y g _ l!'
J
O
w i n
IC / . v \ I _ P
--
--
T, r W r
.0
0
NO HTII Gi h SI121.1
c
a
rn
.1
.ri
Y
I 1 l .. ,.
I i1 i
b 9 0 - E. o ii
1 8. ' m T. i i
7 J2; 1 � - - i t
3 r' N ' N III
• Ct- C r (. 1 T b i . 0)
} _ N o - Z y a HI
r raj ez6 • z 0 m
. C • , )
ci 9 Cri , Qx .
b .
. N (i
01 _
A
0 . J__ X-1 '.
in 411P 8
.,_
Fi
X77 _ _ x
X
• I . i- alm_
V
li€) U- .' --- .
u
1 111 a Mgt (4A 11 SAUNDER'S I iR6 I I 11
n
rn
e t
- - - - - 1 r i LI
2
m
K
9
z la' r
6
m
r
r
nnvni
9 F�
L L
Sz
k 'I J
(R illit
ci
k-- I1' —H I ,
a �
k
td ‘
v
Y
`9 = A. ` yo ' Mk' 1. ` 1 SAUNDER `.} @ I�� `1
' i €3A ;iii' „
f ■ VICTORIAN .
.p ` ,