Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.cu.332 W Smuggler.A43-93 2735-124-15-001 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: 08(24 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: -10 / /93 2735- 124 -15 -001 A43 -93 STAFF MEMBER: LL PROJECT NAME: McCoy Conditional Use Review Project Address: 332 W. Smugaler Legal Address: Lots 8 & 9, Block 40, Hallam's Addition; and Lots K and C, Block 40, City of Aspen APPLICANT: McCoy Creative Construction Applicant Address: 415 E. Hyman, Aspen 920 -2686 REPRESENTATIVE: Ted Guy & Associates, Tony Major Representative Address /Phone: P.O. Box 1640 Basalt, CO 81623 927 -3167 FEES: PLANNING $ # APPS RECEIVED 3 ENGINEER $ # PLATS RECEIVED 3 HOUSING $ ENV. HEALTH $ TOTAL $ 0 TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF APPROVAL: 1 STEP: X 2 STEP: P &Z Meeting DatZ 4 ., PUBLIC HEARING NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO DRC Meeting Date REFERRALS: City Attorney Parks Dept. School District City Engineer Bldg Inspector Rocky Mtn NatGas Housing Dir. Fire Marshal CDOT Aspen Water Holy Cross Clean Air Board . City Electric Mtn. Bell open Space Board Envir.Hlth. ACSD Other Zoning / Energy Center Other (�/ DATE REFERRED: 2- INITIALS: ( ' v DUE: cr/r7 FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED:///7, City Atty City Engineer Zoning Env. Health Housing Open Space Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: \ I RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR 332 WEST SMUGGLER, ASPEN, COLORADO Resolution No. 93 -37 WHEREAS, the applicant, Joseph McCoy, submitted an application for a conditional use review for an attached accessory dwelling unit; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24 -7 -304 of the Municipal Code, an accessory dwelling unit is a conditional use review requiring a public hearing by the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing October 5, 1993; and WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed the application for the construction of an attached, below grade accessory dwelling unit of approximately 350 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Planning staff reviewed the application and recommended denial of the conditional use review because the unit did not meet the goals of the AACP to provide quality affordable housing and the operational characteristics of the proposed unit were not well designed; and WHEREAS, the Commission voted to approve the conditional use review with conditions of approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it does hereby grant a conditional use approval with the following conditions: 1. The roof is redesigned such that the entire access including the stair and sidewalk is out of potential snow shed area. 2. The mechanical room is located out of the accessory unit. Resolution No. 94 -_ ) Page 2 I 3. The sidewalk is shown on the plan connecting the alley and street. 4. Provision for trash be shown on the plans. 5. The applicant shall, upon approval of the deed restriction by the Housing Authority, record the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office with proof of recordation to the Planning Department. 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. 4. The ADU shall comply with U.B.C. Chapter 35 sound attenuation requirements. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on October 5, 1993. ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION By //l/• L Bruce Kerr, Chairperson Date Signed /04 ATTEST: Jan rney, D City Clerk Date Signed I �� 9i I MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Senior Planner RE: McCoy Conditional Use Review DATE: October 5, 1993 SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a single family home with an attached accessory dwelling unit. Staff recommends denial of the conditional use for an accessory dwelling unit. APPLICANT: McCoy Creative Construction LOCATION: 332 West Smuggler, Aspen ZONING: R -6 APPLICANT'S REQUEST: To provide an attached studio accessory dwelling unit pursuant to Ordinance 1 requirements. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Please see attached referral comments from the Engineering Department and the Housing Office. 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 is a below grade unit. The size of the unit was not included in the application but staff estimates the unit is 468 square feet of net liveable. This should be verified by the Housing Authority. The unit must comply with the Housing Guidelines and the requirements of Ordinance 1 and shall be deed restricted as a resident occupied unit for residents of Pitkin County. Although the provision of an accessory dwelling unit is consistent with the City's policy to encourage voluntary development of affordable housing in all neighborhoods, staff believes that this unit is not consistent with the goals of the ADU program. According to the submitted plans the access to the mechanical room for the entire dwelling is through the ADU. Also the stairwell accessing the dwelling unit is not protected from snow shedding off the roof. Finally, the only natural light and air is provided by the front door to the ADU (which is 3' -3" wide) and a side window (which is 4' -8.5" wide and 4' tall). During the pre - application conference staff recommended that the architect move the mechanical room out of the dwelling unit and to protect the stairwell from snow shedding. In the past, the Commission has expressed a concern about accessing ADU's via mechanical rooms or storage rooms and the need to protect below grade units from shedding snow. The applicant chose not to correct these items. 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 surrounding neighborhood is entirely residential. The accessory dwelling unit is attached to the proposed single - family residence. Many accessory dwelling units have been proposed and approved for this neighborhood. However, adjacent residents question whether the single - family home may have been designed in a less impactive manner if the ADU was not accommodated in the plans. Please see attached letter. 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 attached accessory dwelling unit is accessed off of the alley. The primary residence includes four bedrooms and although four parking spaces appear to be provided on the property the garage spaces do not meet the 18' requirement of the Code. The neighbors contend that access off of the alley to the second unit, without parking for the ADU, will have a negative impact on their residence directly across the alley. As stated above, the design of the unit to include the mechanical room, potential snow shedding, and lack of natural light and air are operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use that may have adverse effects on the occupant of that unit. ADU's are intended to be occupied, hopefully on a year round basis. Staff believes that the goal of ADU review is to ensure that quality dwelling units are provided. 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 protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; and 2 v RESPONSE: A single family residence occupied the site. No new services are required for the primary residence and an ADU. 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 includes 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 Community Plan and other requirements of this chapter by attempting to integrate a community housing need into the redevelopment of the property. However, staff does not believe that this attempt is the type of affordable housing that should be encouraged. Ordinance 1 provides two alternatives for mitigating employee housing requirements: provide an ADU or make a cash -in- lieu payment. Staff and the Commission continue to review ADUs in order to make sure that the unit is a quality dwelling unit and to notify surrounding residents of the potential density increase in their neighborhood. Staff recommends that the applicant comply with Ordinance 1 with a cash -in -lieu payment to the housing fund which shall be paid prior to the issuance of any building permits, which is estimated to be $16,735. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the conditional use for the attached accessory dwelling unit for the following reasons: 1. The operating characteristics of the proposed accessory dwelling unit have not been well designed to minimize adverse impacts on the occupant of this unit, and, occupancy is the intended purpose of the ADU program. 2. The provision of the ADU does not meet the goals of the AACP to provide quality affordable housing. A cash -in -lieu payment would more effectively meet the community's goals for affordable housing. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to deny the accessory dwelling unit proposed for 332 West Smuggler finding that it does not comply with standards A and C." ATTACHMENTS: A. Referral Comments B. Site Plan C. Citizen Letters 3 3 MEMORANDUM SEP + 1993 TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: September 16, 1993 RE: McCOY CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT Parcel ID No. 2735- 124 -15 -001 The Housing Office cannot at this time approve this application as submitted. Per the plans submitted for the accessory dwelling unit, the mechanical room for the entire residence is located in this unit. One of the requirements for accessory dwelling units is to have a private area from the principal residence. Should this mechanical room be moved to another location outside of the accessory dwelling unit, the unit must following the conditions 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 Irving 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. Should this unit be approved, 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. This deed restriction can be obtained from the Housing Office. \word \referral mccoy.adu • MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Lamont From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer Date: September 29, 1993 Re: McCoy Conditional Use Review for Accessory Dwelling Unit Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. Parking - The parking spaces in the garage plans are not dimensioned. Using a scale, it appears that there is not the 18' length required by Code. The spaces alongside the alley are not clearly indicated although it appears that there is sufficient room for them. The building permit site plan must indicate the locations and dimensions of all parking spaces. The minimum code requirement is 8 1/2' x 18' x 7' high for head -in spaces. The space(s) may not encroach (extend) into the alley. 2. Sidewalk - The project site is located in the West End of Aspen where sidewalks are not required but pedestrian usahle sidewalk areas are required. The right -of -way space hetween the property line and the street currently is about half usahle by pedestrians, and no development is indicated on the development plans which would preclude pedestrian use within that space. The existing spruce trees must be pruned up to a height of seven feet in order to provide a five foot wide pedestrian space in the public right -of -way hetween the curh and the property line. The final development plan must show the pedestrian space on both Third and Smuggler Streets. 3. Encroachments - The application contents do not include a site improvement survey. There is a concrete wall which may or may not extend into the alley public right -of -way. If the wall extends into the right-of-way, it must be removed at the time of development, or the applicant may apply for an encroachment license from the City at the Engineering Department. 4. Trash - The plan does not indicate a trash storage area. The building permit application plans must indicate a trash storage area on the applicant's property and not in the alley right -of -way. 5. Utilities - If new utility pedestals are required for the project, they must be located on the applicant's property and not in the public right -of -way. 6. Site Drainage - If the ADU would increase storm runoff into public rights -of -way, the increases would need to be mitigated on site. It is not a City requirement for this development to mitigate its storm runoff on site, however roof drains may not daylight into streets or alleys. 7. Development in the Public Right -of -way - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way, we advise the applicant as follows: The applicant shall consult city engineering (920 -5080) for design considerations of development within public rights -of -way, parks department (920 -5120) for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way from city streets department (920 - 5130). Approval of building permit plans does not constitute approval of design or work in the public right -of -way. cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director M 93._ ALLEY O IAAMOLE 1 PLANTER :< tP K.n:tha�� • WJ�IIERI I .,.: }; TOPE ROAMED _. I 11 11 , . � GATE mom __a1�■■■■t '. 4i. \•'f'.. -_ i '..1 .'.'....,... •.•..•.I Y'!9 - &HIGH n r j easnto oat , CPC PATIOS PAm ` �..... • N • ! no WMKWAYS ..... ..... 317 FISH , 1- TO OE REMOVED ' ' '•'• ..' J•• ••. • . •. KAJJG W 1 P-OP aEQ \ \\ I STEPS W PER 1 FUR SIDCN CIB GRADE 1 I Q il r t I - f. N9 t t I / ' �' I , �Fj 0 \ ,t 1 1 \ / / II 11G .� / / / Y 1 > C�1\ ` \t t �'. PROPFRIY .. Q I/ 1 1 41 k 41 LINE r 1 J1 SETBACK 1 III TYR. I Ott , ' , ip v I IT .. 111 x � 1 ' t t , /It /' 1 t t J i / / .! _ i �' 1 J ROOF \ 1 / 1 1 \ ■ MA ABOVE 1 W I !� .J�• CGC � 4D 99 WALKW ' n a &T. TFf � ± I e / g i ( - - - - , ir" r 1 39-0 / 7 2 \, 0 4 abAllier a OM a BGNCHMAFIKI / / • BUILDING T. PLY. ELEV. 100'-0" / 7 . &r ?LEV..'19'•9 // 9m j . I / Z j ( 2 6'-6' 1 1 . ,t 1 ` .> QI�c Elgin a w■ I � 1 ROO& 51-ELF 1 . FL CLOSET FD MECHANICAL or 1 7bb0 µm:BR - - - - 1m- 0 KITCHEN PWDA. —_. k C 1 A P OIY_i 11 i e u5 1 . i L J t- I SHOWER I II ALl _ o =fix I . - - - I:iLQa a \� J /� // A.D.U. BEDROOM � \ hGU ZZI •�� ND i MATH i g 1 ri 2b k 1 0 0 v T 514 . 1 O I BEDROOM 02 �-, II 1 I + ---,4 �0 6.90" EA 1 Li �� *Is-. GAS j 5,"x5, • J/AID FIREPLACE APPLIANCE TUD . ENTERTAINMENT /42"x S6' 1 ilii A I\ FL TH OWNER I \' im 1 -_ — STEP 4 �� I k 1 I r: F I 311 W. North Street, Aspen, CO, 81 61 1 -1 350 (303) 925 -7743 September 22, 1993 Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Attention: Ms. Leslie Lamont City Hall, 130 S. Galena St Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Zoning Commissioners: This letter is to oppose the application submitted by the McCoy's for the accessory dwelling unit located in the basement of a new residence proposed at 322 W. Smuggler St., Aspen, CO 81611. The Review Standards: Development of a Conditional Use, Section C, emphasizes that minimal adverse effects on the surrounding properties should be present. The current design, submitted with the application for Conditional Use, has the following impacts on our residence: • The entry door to the proposed basement unit is just across the alley from our bedroom, with a minimum setback. The noise generated would be most disturbing, and unnecessary. • The owners of the property, the McCoy's, who have personally told us that they will live in the new residence, currently own 1 stretch limousine, 3 cars, 1 truck and 2 motorcycles. The addition of a caretaker unit, which does not require an additional parking space, but will, in practice, bring additional automobiles to the alley, will have an enormous noise impact on our home. In particular, Mr. McCoy has proposed to us that he wants to black top the alley, in order to make his vehicular access easier. He even stated that the reason he's leaving his present home on 3rd Street is to have an alley to park his cars and work on them. We find that this use, plus having a caretaker unit (since it's in the basement, with inadequate lighting and access, we hesitate to call the proposed unit a caretaker apartment) results in too high a density of traffic and noise in our neighborhood. A study of the present, existing uses of the alley would reveal that no present owners use it for more than garbage disposal, and that present vehicular use is that of the garbage truck. The opening up of the alley for vehicular use would encourage use of it in the summer as a normal city street, which it clearly is not. Further, in the winter, access to the alley is very difficult, due to snow pileup, plowing, etc. Since the entrance to the proposed caretaker unit is from the alley, this would further add to the parking congestion on the streets. The on -site facilities would NOT be used during that period. If the caretaker unit were moved 6\ above ground, separate from the main house, with an entrance from the street, and not the alley, with a parking space on the site for this unit, in addition to the normal parking requirements for the main house, which would effectively reduce the size of the house, and hence the visual, as well as the noise impacts on the neighborhood, we would support the application. However, what we perceive is an attempt to build a house to the legal property lines, maximum height limits and maximum FAR, and, get away with: a) one less parking space than normally required, b) avoid paying about $20,000 that would be required for in-lieu of for employee housing, c) a larger dwelling than otherwise would be legally required. He gains all of this by simply building a basement that he never has to rent. This results in a much larger house than legally would have been allowed on a small lot (6200 sq. ft.), as well as a far- cheaper one. We would like to note a quotation by Samuel Butler: When the righteous man turneth away from his righteousness that he hath committed and doeth that which Is neither quite lawful nor quite right, he will generally be found to have gained in amiability what he has lost in holiness. -- Samuel Butler We hope Mr. McCoy is now rather amiable. In summary, we strongly oppose the Conditional Use, as a subterfuge and a blight on the neighborhood. The McCoy's are speculators, who will wreck the West End, if left alone. As evidence, we submit the enclosed real estate ad from the Aspen Times, which describes the present home, and the proposed construction. Clearly, they are in it for financial gain, and not residency. We plead with the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission to reject the request for Conditional Use, and close with yet another quotation, this one from Gandhi: A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a "Yes" merely uttered to please, or what Is worse, to avoid trouble. — Mahatma Gandhi Sincerely, Bea . lock ?fal7L WCt Martin M. Block 7 ;z a G 0 vY r� ) �_ Th Trese,..+ hom Y jam, ,,.k : :l } X y 0111PP" . ti itioni vlll u.�� SEsr coy -3302 U • s li �r {Pr opose co H-tt k4, use- 280 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO. 01611 (303)925 - 2915 September 27, 1993 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Attention: Ms. Leslie Lamont City Hall, 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Co. 91611 Dear Zoning Commissioners: This letter Is written to oppose the approval for the accessory dwelling unit as submitted in the application for a new residence at 322 W. Smuggler St., Aspen, Co. We built a home at 280 Lake Avenue in 1991 are are well-aware of the regulations governing accessory dwellings, parking spaces, payments in lieu of employee housing, etc. While the specific requirements may have changed since then, surely the spirit of the law which inspired them has not. Standards hinge on "minimal adverse effects" on the neighborhood and, in this case, they clearly are not being met. My understanding is that the approval of the application will result in a basement caretaker unit with access from the alley and which does not require an additional parking space. This fact, coupled with the large vehicular fleet owned by the McCoys, will surely have more than "minimal adverse effects." It will clog the alley and exacerbate the parking problems that already exist in the West End. I also draw your attention to the ads which have appeared in the Aspen Times advertising the future house for sale! If this is to be viewed as a speculative venture, rather than a residency, then that is even more reason to deny the aglication since profit alone has been the deciding factor in the applicant's design considerations. A builder who is building a structure with the Intent of selling it will certainly try to go for maximum square footage without considering such profitless Intangibles as "the good of the neighborhood." Since the law does not require that the unit be used for employee housing, this application represents the most obvious way to maximize square footage without paying the in lieu of fee. The West End has a certain character which is of great value to those of us who have chosen to live there. it is the most important repository of Aspen's residential past. For us, "home" and "real estate" do not have the same meaning. Scale is a part of the West End's character and it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain in light of pressures from escalating land costs and huge profit potential. I believe it is contingent upon your commission to stand for those values that preserve the integrity of this very special neighborhood. Sincerely, Dimitri G. Perros Diane D. Perros E A Petition OPPOSING the McCoy Application for a Basement Accessory Dwelling Unit at 322 W. Smuggler We, the undersigned, oppose the application of Lillian and Joseph McCoy for an accessory dwelling unit in the basement of a proposed new dwelling at 322 W. Smuggler; on a 6200 sq. ft. lot. We oppose it under clause C, of Review Standards: Development of Conditional Use, for the following reasons. 1. The proposed house is on a small lot of 6200 sq. ft. The design uses up the legal limit of FAR, 3260 sq. ft. above ground, as well as the maximum height limit. The addition of a caretaker unit in the basement, with access only from the alley, would further crowd the property. The proposed home, with these dimensions, significantly impacts the visual perspective of the neighborhood. 2. The caretaker unit doesn't legally require additional on -site parking -- -this will additionally crowd the neighborhood, with on- street parking being used. 3. The McCoy's now own three (3) cars, plus one (1) stretch limousine, one (1) truck and two (2) motorcycles. The addition of a caretaker unit, with more automobiles, will only contribute to the traffic congestion and noise pollution in our area, as well as raise a dust storm from the alley during the summer. With Aspen suffering from particulate pollution, this is an unnecessary source. 4. The addition of a caretaker unit, with its entrance only a minimal distance (across the alley) from the Block's bedroom window, at 31 1 W. North, is also a major source of noise pollution. Name �� '�' , dress Name Address tie / r / I�2,33 to.. &kdeft. t r 4181 / - 93 . ' Sit U4 /F /rl' 133 A/, A • jr. A.'CAt/Fg 3e9 w'. te4'1 5i, \ e k \ - v Ou - D L v3 ` 1 PeQ A C Dui ,t 9B Igarko \k A Petition OPPOSING the McCoy Application for a Basement Accessory Dwelling Unit at 322 W. Smuggler We, the undersigned, oppose the application of Lillian and Joseph McCoy for an accessory dwelling unit in the basement of a proposed new dwelling at 322 W. Smuggler; on a 6200 sq. ft. lot. We oppose it under clause C, of Review Standards: Development of Conditional Use, for the following reasons. 1. The proposed house is on a small lot of 6200 sq. ft. The design uses up the legal limit of FAR, 3260 sq. ft. above ground, as well as the maximum height limit. The addition of a caretaker unit in the basement, with access only from the alley, would further crowd the property. The proposed home, with these dimensions, significantly impacts the visual perspective of the neighborhood. 2. The caretaker unit doesn't legally require additional on -site parking - - -this will additionally crowd the neighborhood, with on- street parking being used. 3. The McCoy's now own three (3) cars, plus one (1) stretch limousine, one (1) truck and two (2) motorcycles. The addition of a caretaker unit, with more automobiles, will only contribute to the traffic congestion and noise pollution in our area, as well as raise a dust storm from the alley during the summer. With Aspen suffering from particulate pollution, this is an unnecessary source. 4. The addition of a caretaker unit, with its entrance only a minimal distance (across the alley) from the Block's bedroom window, at 311 W. North, is also a major source of noise pollution. Name Address Name Address _, ,, \_ rfl 31( LU. N�z� dO/ Aft ,,o v eA 1O I r= , (-cr 5 C11 4 ., 6 6ao/1/ A 15 1 toy L-4K� ve ' (.). 3 /1* ,�" i! (20 N 3 *O In 1p. S un -4._. A Petition OPPOSING the McCoy Application for a Basement Accessory Dwelling Unit at 322 W. Smuggler We, the undersigned, oppose the application of Lillian and Joseph McCoy for an accessory dwelling unit in the basement of a proposed new dwelling at 322 W. Smuggler, on a 6200 sq. ft. lot. We oppose it under clause C, of Review Standards: Development of Conditional Use, for the following reasons. 1. The proposed house is on a small lot of 620C/sq. ft. The design uses up the legal limit of FAIR, 3260 sq. ft above ground, as well as the maximum height limit. The addiction of a caretaker unit in the basement, with access only from the alley, would further crowd the property. The proposed home, with these dimensions, significantly impacts the visual perspective of the neighborhood. 2. The caretaker unit doesn't legally require additional on -site parking---this will additionally crowd the neighborhood, with on- street patiting being used. 3. The McCoy's now own three (3) cars, plus one (1) stretch fenousine, one (i) truck and two (2) motorcycles. The addition of a caretaker unit, with more automobiles, will only contribute to the traffic cnngesdon and noise pollution in our area, as well as raise a dust storm from the alley during the summer. With Aspen suffering from particulate pollution, this is an unnecessary source - 4. The addition of a caretaker unit, with its entrance only a minimal distance (across the alley) from the Block's bedroom window, at 311 W. North, is also a maior source of noise pollution. Name Address Name Address td p inO ,Colo i1+e ;'... :n.) Zeo Lmrct *,.• TOTAL P.04 . cQ / ,, Mk �iATN KIT -, . r P MaiI NM' ADIJ f ,E I 7K 00M noui o f IIII..WM I' - 11� t �� ® MV I , I�O�1 te, �\ I ' �y�� OATH IR g .a 1► . 4 7 ` ; ; L' .:, . s'a • C %', - $ "�oM ii Ell # z II : : r n Ais ttaikal Frenur MIME t . ©. � ¢v t Ti. n FNTFRTAINMENT 1 ik I l i 'i12, FWSNIEARnI d_ Drama J ii0 �eH N s s v t • [[ A uF u 1• o 111 II �RnrIM 1 _ � 1 . n f - ati:•. w . • r ... �L NOTER � �. v r[trr 1101WO ICIt DOWER xNxw�rRNw[x ,... wFMFF COMM RNWfIGI1RL[y > ,. 1 -..,..,-/-- g wfON[EYINOMPOTIEM![ NV' TJYl 9$ L. �. f1604 Ut sWIFCOnfMC t [f4 0 F 834 • 8J VC ra Ye 16 Matta MNCO%Nn[[ K.9 owrzll6 atom mare no 29$ ® Q$ -1' 8$ D8$ $ f xNl nOlID no 88 mat OHM AS FMK. CmaNI LOWER FLOOR PLAN ® 3 CV SSOHN n[wvcCu 7001WIIC/11Y • to 1 M WEIeo Mc SIMMS 3 ITCHWUES if EOSMCMN4 UN SALM NN[EOa N[ a[OCUPN SI MI N II! _AMeNPEt A- DU. L4 (8LJ -r 1y rfK :o., ¶! f1 rilrlt, _1c COI B rs i DE Llte 33 5MUC76Ll=K 9, or - 6 86 / C N7 6" NM' , , . u" reF. 9•2 r s• c• v s 6 ' A I • '� 4' ,�VfKi�AAJ6 , . . / s s,, V ill s e - c. ' .1 7 , `'w''' 1% U. 1 o I ''' r,s I MASTER BATH 0 ,I� ('. I i: � : _ III MASTER BEDROOM 0. ' 1 TAI k' ,, LrEOF �O T�i o�� a EYEBRON tv ROOF DELON > vcGEARA+cE ii r GAS E It' t . It a: z , BEDROOM # 3 1 'viola i '�i 111" o '4 * 1k1?�ST I _ i 3'6' - 3 -- g d'� _.'CLOSE 1 O ! :t . ill / _ .1- ,,, r + _rye ,, � . 1 t ��L �I ,„, • BATH # 3 I ©. b 0 ■ "� A � e' I OPEN TO BELOW u 0 maw 111 . -� ' ' - Fib,' A • V ` If BLI OM ..... AlUisiph,.' T 4 , : . i „, ..., Q, N iOFROA1 BF10N pie �� J A, 1 44 , re Mir / 2 -9 V2 9-5' / 2 -9 V2 y & • r 5 V '1' 2 2,9 112” , 9 £ 2 -9 V2' { 6-0' 9 C E ' {Y 39'-0' UPPER FLOOR PLAN _ /jam / , _ „ 11 332 MU&6.EK APpENOUr'1 l — T 6 Gv VE KED 15`( '�DDF DVE AK) ■ i '� � • `,, "t r0. fa 332 5 Mtgi Etc ' ` ` ALLEY r ,; .. a WALKWAY D E `er i ' . Fob A I FFJI I ,�- . r STORAGE) O Cala ORIYEWA7 , SPA MECH. 1 ---. GD � u G N WALKW4 1 ERK A.17V. 1 - �J_16' i Ii MOP / _ I ENCE \ AI 7. 1 ii • ( i � �i I --I . fig ; i , Arerj 1 I i ' . .444-. i 1 t. , 1 A 1 I 1 , . I ie �- 1 4 , 4 1 1 1 1 4W 1 k l PROPE urE RTY 1 1 - -1 NG • i � .7YP. 1 1 1 1 E�fl / � BUILDING ' • - 1 PROFILE ,1 I 1 I I 1 I I I I _ _ i I I I I I I ___I 1 i 1 1 ( I 1 a 01 T 1 1 ___,____ f 1 1 1 1 1 L - MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Leslie Lamont CC Bill Drueding CC George Robinson From: Rebecca Baker Postmark: Oct 08,93 8:59 AM Subject: Reply to: mccoy Reply text: From Rebecca Baker: George had asked Mr McCoy to get back to him regarding who removed the tree and dug out the stump but we have never heard from him. So I would ask that his building permit be held up until we receive that info ( if this is possible). Then we can discuss mitigation of the tree. Thanks. Preceding message: From Leslie Lamont: well they unfortunately approved the ADU. please let me know what mitigation you will be requiring and i'll attach that to the building permit. thanks X • December 23, 1993 ASPEN •PITKIN • PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Mr. McCoy 415 E. Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. McCoy, This letter is in response to your phone call. I have notified the Building Department of your decision. They have indicated that the valuation of the permit fee is in question and may increase the plan check and fees permit. This is a matter that you must review with that Department. Bill Drueding, our Zoning Officer, will calculate the amount of cash -in -lieu housing mitigation that you owe'for the demolition and replacement of the single - family home. In addition, you must resolve with George Robinson of the Parks Department the removal of the tree that used to be on the 312 Smuggler property. Once you have paid the housing mitigation fee, cleared up the removal of the tree and the valuation for the permit fee, you will be issued a building permit for the plans submitted 7/20/93. After you have been issued the permit you must submit a Change Order to eliminate the accessory dwelling unit from your submitted plans. Unfortunately, the Building Department cannot accept Change Orders until permits have been issued. Sincerely, r Leslie Lamont, Senior Planner ' cc: Diane Moore, Planning Director Bill Drueding, Zoning Officer • Stephen Kanipe, Building Official George Robinson, Director of Parks • • 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • PHONE 303.920.5090 • FAX 303.920 51D7 Rim Nt IN pipe 1 eo� PZM10.5.93 MOTION David: I make a motion to approve the conditional use review for accessory dwelling unit with the following conditions: To re- design the roof such that the entire access including the stair and sidewalk is out of potential snow shed area at staff's discretion. That the mechanical room be located out of the accessory dwelling unit. That the sidewalk be shown on the plan to the street. That trash provisions be shown on the plan for this unit. That this unit meet UBC sound continuation requirements. That appropriate deed restrictions be filed. Jasmine seconded the motion. Roger: You don't want to add additional light well- - David: I don't see how it could easily- - Roger: On the powder room side. Kim: You can't do it there. Leslie: They are at the floor area. Sara: I would like to ask the applicant if these conditions are acceptable. McCoy: I think I can meet the appropriate changes. I don't see any major problem except the mechanical. I will have to play around with that a little bit. I don't think you are asking the impossible for the overhang. Sara: The reason I ask I wonder if it is correct to vote on an application if he doesn't think it can be done. ?: Yes. Everything you have asked for can be done. Tim: I think it is important for me to say what we are concerned about is the quality of life for the person who is living here. This is basically their home. Their bed is in the middle of their kitchen. So to have plumbing or heating or any kind of work done it really infringes on the quality of life for this person. That is what we are concerned about. We are not trying to deny your house. We are thinking about who is going to be here and what it is going to mean comfort -wise to have someone go through someone's bedroom to work on the plumbing. Roll call vote: Tim, yes, David,yes, Sara, yes, Jasmine, yes, Roger, yes, Bruce,no. 17 PZM10.5.93 Bruce: I would offer a suggestion to the applicant that - -you heard the discussion earlier this evening about the problems with notice. You may have some problems yourself that you may want to try to take care of. This motion passed 5 to 1. Bruce closed the public portion of the hearing. ICE RINK NAMES Commission members then made their suggestions for the naming of the ice rink. David suggested "Icearonie ", "Ice on Holiday ". Roger suggested "Silva Coicle" (with a New York accent) David also suggested modifying the last entry on the list to read "The Hans Cantrup, John Roberts, Donald Trump, Mohammed Ish Hadid, Big Shot Developer skating on thin ice, Memorial Rink ". Sara suggest "The Jerry Garcia Too - Many- Trips- Without -A -Car Ice Rink ". Bruce: I am for the most vanilla, bland kind of thing you can come up with. Call it "The Ice Rink" or "Ritz Rink ". David: As much as I would like to call it "Rink Around the Collar" I nominate "Ralph Jackson Ice Rink ". Tim: How about "Stuart Mace ". Or "Mace Memorial Rink ". Tim: "Ice and Easy ". Roger: "The Silver Circle ". Bruce: I think it needs to say "Ice" somewhere in the name. Sara: "The Ice Block ". Meeting was then adjourned. Time was 7:20 P.M. Janice M. /Carney, City . puty Clerk 18 ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone 920 -5090 FAX 920 -5197 MEMORANDUM TO: City Attorney Housing Director FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office RE: McCoy Conditional Use Review Parcel ID No. 2735 - 124 -15 -001 DATE: September 2, 1993 Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by McCoy Creative Construction. Please return your comments to me no later than September 17. Thank you. zco Creams ,e CoCons/rue/ion (/ & interiors, S . August 23, 1993 CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT RE: Lots 8,iSnd 9, Block 40, Hallam's Addition to the City of Aspen, and Lots K and L, Block 40, City of Aspen. (332 W. Smuggler) County of Pitkin, State of Colorado This letter of authorization is for Ted Guy and Associates to act as the owner's representative concerning the ADU permit being applied for at 332 Smuggler St. Permit #3 -481 Re .e tf lly, /. I J.seph . % . a/ ! , / / G, dr G % ? .' llian M. McCoy 415 E. HYMAN AVENUE • ASPEN, CO 81611 (303) 920 -2686 • FAX (303) 920 -2673 GENERAL WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED made this / day of July, 1993, between MAVEN REAL ESTATE CO., A COLORADO CORPORATION, hereinafter ( "Grantor ") and JOSEPH H. McCOY and LILLIAN McCOY, hereinafter ( "Grantee "), whose legal address is 415 East Hyman Avenue, Suite 306, Aspen, Colorado 81611. WITNESSETH That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold, and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the Grantees, their successors and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, described as follows: Lots 8 and 9, Block 40, Hallam's Addition to the City of Aspen, and Lots K and L, Block 40, City of Aspen. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. Also known by street and number as 332 West Smuggler, Aspen, Colorado 81611. I•- n U TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the Grantees, their succes- sors and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain and agree to and with the Grantees, their successors and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, it is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encum- brances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except the following exceptions: 1. Right of way for ditches or canals as reserved in Patent recorded in Book 55 at Page 02. 1 2. The terms, conditions and obligations of that Deed of Trust recorded in Book 699 at Page 948_ as Reception No. 35267, and the Promissory Note secured thereby, and as amended by that Modification Agreement recorded in Book 702 at Page 566. All documents are recorded in the records of Pitkin County, Colorado. The Grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above - bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantees, their successors and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this General Warranty Deed on the date set forth above. MAVEN REAL ESTATE CO., A COLORADO ORPbRATION /r By: , "/,';�./ / A Its /% 2t STATE OF C D Lpt^aeDC ) ) ss. COUNTY OF r t .. t tO The foregoing General Warranty Deed was acknowledged and sworn to before me this - f4-h day of July, 1993, by Maven Real Estate Co., A Colorado Corporation, by tL.(G-t..;:.Y. f.P1t& ti_ , its My commission expires: Witness my hand and official seal. i Joy S. Higens Public Notary P bl is j\ • My Commission expires 4/22'94 601 East Hopkins Aspen. Colorado 81611 c:\wpf1tes \reatestate \mccoy.gud 2 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: MCCOY CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 5, 1993 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen to consider an application submitted by Lillian and Joseph McCoy, 415 E. Hyman, Aspen, CO, requesting approval of a Conditional Use Review for an accessory dwelling unit on the basement level of a proposed new residence. The property is located at 332 W. Smuggler; Lots 8 & 9, Block 40, Hallam's Addition, and Lots K & C, Block 40, City of Aspen. For further information, contact Leslie Lamont at the Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 920 -5101. s /Bruce Kerr, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission ed 1 ll p-u cif 5 • THEODORE IC OU' SSOCIATES PC • ARCHITECTS AND ST ENGINEERS August 23, 1993 City of Aspen Planning 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Attention: Leslie Lamont RE: McCoy Residence 3rd & Smuggler Streets Aspen, Colorado Legal Description: Lots 8 and 9, Block 40, Hallams addition to the City of Aspen and Lots K and C, Block 40, City of Aspen Dear Leslie: The following is a description of the proposed residence and a request for approval to develop an accessory dwelling unit within the proposed building. The proposed residence consists of a 3,260 SF two story structure with a full basement, four bedrooms, four and one half bathrooms, and a two car garage. The architecture is patterned after the Victorian style prevalent throughout Aspen, with steep roofs, tall glass windows and small dormers. A two story house with a detached garage has been removed from the site which had a total area of 2,529 SF. Total area of new structure FAR above grade is 3,260 SF. The residence will be built within an existing residential neighborhood and will not adversely affect existing visual, pedestrian, access, noise, or trash service conditions. Parking is provided on site, and impact to existing traffic patterns will be minimal. Public services in place will be adequate to handle all new construction proposed. The accessory dwelling unit proposed will be located on the basement level with a private entrance. The unit spaces include one bedroom, kitchen /laundry area, closet, and three quarter bath. The dwelling unit offers on -site housing for a caretaker and addresses a growing need to provide such housing within the Aspen city limits. Please contact us immediately if any other items are required. Sincerely, Tony Major, Project Architect THEODORE K GUY ASSOCIATES PC TM /Ik 93133 L3 . 7 3Clzy 4-`f3 23200 STATE HIGHWAY 62 P.O. BOX 1640 BASALT. COLORADO 81621 1303] 927 -3167 _ __ _ __ _ CITY OF ASPEN 2 /I PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUM,ARY_ ^ :� PROJECT :I I'C'':! -Sr r.n.q_:. tt c1 r „i..!' % t: _ . -L. APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE '€ `L;0 REPRESENTATIVE'S ?HOLM: D a'- - , 'a 1 `0 y. OWNENAM: 'S NA: 1 , QJ !1! . (b ,-i? .J.j...1/'• - - t i (Th r SSt!i' ( i( " i 1 r ^ `,. f 1 . SUMMARY � " � .) • 1. Type of Application: �� r ,l l,h, X . 1 ) 2. •': Describe action /type of development bein requested: , `r Q 4t r, E-A �r a QAZYv OL h .r)"(`- 30f U ' v 1 t ��� a> C t/ 1 ^ Ca ! -u�: �3E'L b 1.1 L !t �� \) 61J` t ../ . . tt.A w . , ) f 3. Areas is which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: Policy Area/ Referral Anent Comments /1411/#04-_— "A - - 1f1 ' _ 1111 4. Review �•. P &2 Only) (CC Only) (P &Z then to CC) 5. Public Hearing: c (YES) (NO) 6. Number of copies of the application to be submitted: 7. What fee was applicant requested to submit:i Li 9•= 8. Anticipated date' of submission: Gt• - 9. _COMMENTS /UNIQUE_ CONCERNS: Post -It" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 too nens ■ t ' -J f riA pre_app w p ( r Fro % co. o Phono"CI'ac� .3/c,„) i F ax,! Pa" q a3 yR/ 3 . 1C, r L'A'ND rn Ina APPISGlT10N FORof M 1) Project Nagre lS.22rc2, 2) Project Location 321. 0.14 %u z Ape (Ink 55,1. 6\ 4. 9fl , 4Uo,m5 Pr *11" (4h k.( t, Risk 1 c;4 m paw ( i n d i c a t e street address, l o t 5 blodc amber, l e g a l descnpticn % 4 r app sate) 3) Present Zoning , a` 'CO 4) tot Size CoZ00 st, 5) Applicant's Name, Address & Ftcne f M6(,x1 (nee,;+ CwNcskrwlbn l tc, Ne " °i .. 4A t\ '120 • Z • i nn 6) Representative's Name, Address & Phone : T J Gw 4 iszi.x+ • 23230 ttt.x �'2 , 6aSc.'.,1- (tI co `bty 7) Type of Application (please oleic all that apply): / /� Conditional Use ___ Commptual SPA _ Conceptual Hisbaric Dev. Spar;al Review _ Final SPA __ Final Historic Rev _ 8040 Green i e CcnceptualPUD Hiner Historic Ow. Steam Margin _ Final PM ^ Historic Demolition Mculta.in View Plane ^ Subdivision' • Historic Designation CYrdhi -^ i tm?.i2at3an' _^ 'naxt,/liar Aseeninent _ Q IS Allotment Tat Sp1it,/X.ot Line • . Exempting. . • • Adjustment 8) E .actr;z ion of Existing Uses '(rater and type of existing structures; ergo:primate sq. ft.; nueber of balrvcros; any previous approvals granted to the property)- • 2 S}oc1 rafkra2.. f V 319 S. •() ,, 2 Witioscit MJc- �: 1 %?e4 \ cret. owx1, •at2.. 45o S �• . 1e}G aces. ' v a. Aeck... = 2521 S,T, 9) Description of Development Application ^ 40 attic • • 3Z6o c , t3.. erArk.oncrt. ( C3z6o ;s �,A•R 10) Have you attach the following? � Respa e to Attachment 2 minima iSsien Contents - 7 -- — I cm once to Attachment 3, Specific a ee l Calla' its / Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application ...i..... 1 u N 'tr. mut r; fit koarior . • e, .. 0 * talk o } 4 444 ....... 4 Ve. •r CI I I .,,•,_ , 4 0 , 4• ••• 0 1 / 41 1111 4 CI • • -I L' '' % re,* R . Greer. . . r , 414 I 4 4 6%6. est°S° 4 , r... ... ..4 iti m • Amen e • 10 institute 111- MS . , i? I .... sa e. - # _ 4 ‘4 rr 1 Mint eF-1 .4.1 Hallam 41 Not every street or road Is Lake ° bit re C..3 * lit i ^1 sr , named on maps or Wed In 'O street gulden. Gonstmetion of Zit P. Si ' - it it 11, Vino St a streets and roads may be In progress in aulnin areas. in■ rea . il . arlitat ‘6 0 Litt i Aspen a Smirk" Mtn au _ alraiarillitre- Ste 4%4 v I 4 0 r an 111 1 1 1 1 18111,Ai k 44 % Ma SITE _ allerrinitil tt et I IimptIal M e, fir lir* n Lake to te 41/ 4Tt t it 111 Mi l c ir St To . 2.411141 Galena St.— ...-......11-5 eadow Dr---. H-2 Vic ine Gerneseh Se.-._. _....0.114-5 Meadowood Dr.—.0.11-2 ,fitR i • 1 to Dr F-2-3 Gilleapie St..-- ..1 Min Se . 4 1 3/44,. 04 Heather Le. Cr-H 2 Mountain View br E-2 3 Mr • ' tad Ct. -0-3 Hie St _H-5 Mt Laurel 0 . .14 • teeth Rd__ 2-1-5 Hemostat Dr. .E .-2 Mt el laur Dr . 1-341 4 Anati % -, •o ezcb Dr ..........._...E-P-2-3 Hopkins Av G.H 34 Neal Av _II 6 / 414%"1.1 a .e :1/4a N5Fi st Le- ---..E.2-1 Hunter St__. ..H-5 North St- F.3-4 ( .1, .. " 10 ealk • 2 ..... E-3 Regent St. ..1.. H-6-7 As ale CD------147 hunio S _H-5 Park Cir.-- 11-6 River Dr - 1 - 4 Ad Rd-- E-2 /Cmg Se H4 Peel Se F4 Riverside Av 1 .H-6 Spring Se a-11 5-6 Ind St-----.....11-6 Lake F-G-0 Placer La. ......P-5 Riverside Dr ....I ..... .....4-7 14-7 Spruce Se 0-6 • 'AV .F-0-3 Rivenide Se....1 .. 1-6 &MIMI SL H-5 ITI Lake Rd.. 1-7 • ne Rd 0-5-6 1011111/356 Path. .H-2 Roaring Fork Ek .1-7 Vine Se_ -I-14 Puppy Smith Se 0-5 Rowing Fork RH .1 Walnut Se 0-6 0 • Magnifico Rd. .2-4 Pyramid Rd. F I Sage a 1. k__.-.---- 5 Main Se ..... ___ 041.3-5 Queen St. H-6 Sensual Or I._ Av - Mamon Creek Rd__ _G-H-I-2 Ram St.-. To Twin Lakes E-5 1 • • • • Pass fl To - croft a .01 A tit I i 11 E. AL PHA MAPS in VI i KI ir( Mei' ISSUED TI-1E0DORE K GUY ASSOCIATES PC SHEET 8.2rili ARCHITECTS AND STRUCTURAL. ENGINEERS 11 L (49( Ftell7a\las:# DRAWN P.O. BOX 1640 CHECKED BASALT. COLORADO S1621 (303) 927-3167 OF