HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20190219
AGENDA
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
REGULAR MEETING
February 19, 2019
4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room
130 S Galena Street, Aspen
I. SITE VISIT
II. ROLL CALL
III. COMMENTS
A. Commissioners
B. Planning Staff
C. Public
IV. MINUTES
A. February 5, 2019
V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Lot 4 - Ranger Station Subdivision - Design Variations
B. 465 and 557 North Mill Street Rezoning (PH)
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
VIII. BOARD REPORTS
IX. ADJOURN
Next Resolution Number: 4:30
Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings
1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda)
2) Provide proof of legal notice (affi d avit of notice for PH)
3) Staff presentation
4) Board questions and clarifications of staff
5) Applicant presentation
6) Board questions and clari fications of applicant
7) Public comments
8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments
9) Close public comment portion of bearing
10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment
1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification
End of fact finding.
Deliberation by the commission commences.
No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public
12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners.
13) Discussion between commissioners*
14) Motion*
*Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met.
Revised April 2, 2014
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
1
Staff Comments ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Commission Comments ................................................................................................................................ 2
Minutes ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Public Comment not on the Agenda ............................................................................................................. 2
1011 E. Hopkins Ave – Special Review – Replacement of ADU ................................................................ 2
331-338 Midland Ave – Aspen Hills – Growth Management and Associated Reviews .............................. 2
Wireless Regulations – Code Amendment Referral ..................................................................................... 6
P1
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
2
At 4:30 p.m.; Teraissa McGovern called the regular meeting to order with Commission Members Skippy
Mesirow, Ryan Walterscheid, Jimmy Marcus, Ruth Carver and Scott Marcoux present. Rally Dupps
arrived a few minutes late. Also present were Andrea Bryan and Linda Manning.
Staff Comments
Jennifer Phelan, community development, told the commission there may be a runoff election in April.
The regular meeting on April 2 will need to be canceled. The next regular meeting will be April 16th. We
could do April 23 or 30 for a regular meeting. The State planning conference will be in Snowmass
Village on September 18 through 20. If any commissioners are interested in attending let us know. What
if any topics would you be interested in hearing about. They do a commissioner track at the conference.
Commission Comments
None.
Minutes
Mr. Marcus moved to approve the minutes from January 22, 2019; seconded by Ms. Carver. All in favor,
motion carried.
Public Comment not on the Agenda
None.
1011 E. Hopkins Ave – Special Review – Replacement of ADU
Garrett Larimar, community development, stated the public notice was not provide pursuant to the code.
There was an error with the paper noticing. We need to continue the hearing to March 26. Ms.
McGovern moved to continue the public hearing for 1011 E Hopkins Avenue to March 26, 2019;
seconded by Mr. Walterscheid. All in favor, motion carried.
331-338 Midland Ave – Aspen Hills – Growth Management and Associated Reviews
Mr. Larimer said he would like to add to the record letters of public comment received after the packet
was uploaded. The proposal is Aspen Hills condo redevelopment. The original hearing was on
December 4, 2018 and was continued to January 22. The property is located at 331-338 Midland Avenue.
Currently it contains 8 units in a free market residential building. It is located in the RMF zone outside
the infill area. The current proposal is to redevelop to contain 14 units, 8 in the existing and 6 free market
in a new building. The proposal triggers demolition. Reviews include GMQS – general review,
affordable housing and multi family demo replacement. The applicant is asking for a dimensional
variance for parking in the setback. Mr. Dupps arrived at 4:35. Since the last hearing, additional changes
have been made to comply with the code. Additional amenities to allow for below grade conditions for
the affordable housing. The applicant went back and added two amenities including additional storage
below the parking and a rooftop deck. Additional storage is below the affordable housing covered
parking, 23 x 22 feet. Each unit will have 32 feet of storage accessed by a stacked stair. He showed
renderings of the storage. To the east of the existing building is a bump out in the property line where
they will locate stairs to provide access to the rooftop deck. The deck measures approximately 20 x 20
square feet. The application design shows the deck set in to the existing roof. Interior roof height is 9
feet below the roof top units. He showed a rendering of the roof top space. The code requirement is for a
one hour fire enclosure rating. One of staff’s main concerns of the application as a whole, is the lack of
buffer between the development and the adjacent properties. It does have negative impacts on the
P2
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
3
neighboring properties. We are in favor of adding amenities for the affordable housing units but not at an
increased negative impact for the neighbors. The applicants submitted option B for a stacked stair to the
north of the existing structure to provide access to the rooftop deck. Staff feels the alternative is
preferable because the access does not have negative impacts on the neighbors and the deck is entirely
outside the setback.
The reviews required include special review for the replacement of the non conforming structure.
There is a below grade condition. More than 50% of A7 and A8 are below grade. This requires special
review and approval. There are four elements for approval. 1st is significant storage included. 2nd is
above average natural light provided. 3rd is the net livable needs to be above the minimum required in the
APHCA guidelines. 4th is outdoor living space must be provided. Staff feels that significant storage has
been provided with overhead storage and with the addition of the below grade storage. Light tubes and
sky lights are provided. APCHA recommended the size and the addition of the roof top deck. Staff feels
these are met.
Dimensional variance for the parking in the setback. Transportation complies with the requirements of
the code.
RDS are the same and would comply with administrative review.
Staff feels the review criteria are met and would approve the special request for below grade with the
condition of option B for the stair location. Staff is supportive of approving the application and requested
reviews with the option B.
Mr. Mesirow said the option that puts the stairs in the enclosure what is the requirement. Mr. Larimar
replied it is a fire code. Ms. McGovern stated because of the proximity to the property line it is required
to be enclosed.
Applicant presentation
Chris Bendon, representing the applicant, said the nature of the property and the ways the lines are drawn
is from a 1969 plat filing prior to the county and city having subdivisions. It didn’t account for setbacks.
Phase 1 is 8 units in the existing building. Phase 2 is 6 additional units. We do have interest in pursuing
mechanical lifts in the free market units to provide one additional car parking space in each unit if we can
have them count towards our parking. Unit 7 is below grade according to the pre development
topography. In reality, the 1st floor is above grade. Last meeting we were discussing the additional
amenities. Parking and light tubes. Staff had a concern about the storage being accessible only from one
end. Our plan is to use attic reach down ladders. The additional storage is below grade under the car
parking. 4 x 8 dimension per unit. They are much more accessible for every day use. The deck and stair
enclosure does have to be fire rated. It could include windows. It is our preference that it is in this area.
We feel it works best here but are amenable to the option B. He showed images of the back notch. While
staff is concerned about the aesthetic it is parking for the neighboring projects. We do comply with the
setbacks if it is in the back.
On parking, we had the conversation with the commission a few times. It is not a negotiable point. You
either meet the requirements or you don’t. Our project exceeds the requirement for on site parking. We
are sensitive to the issue. There has been a lot of discussion about the management and operation of street
parking and issues of long term car storage. We are sensitive and supportive of more operational
requirements from the city and street management program. Second is the mechanical lifts. If we can
accommodate it within the budget we will provide a mechanical lift for the free market for a second car.
It is additional cost to do the excavation and provide the mechanism. What would persuade us to do that
is if it would count towards or parking mitigation.
Mr. Marcus said if you were to add the lifts what is the total count with them. Mr. Bendon said it is 17
now, we have the ability to add as many as 6 to take us to 23. Each one will have their own engineering
issues so we can’t promise we could get all 6. Ms. Phelan said they can provide more parking but it does
not meet the technical requirements of a parking space so they can’t get a waiver of a parking space. It is
not allowed to be exempted. They are supposed to have unobstructed access. They can do it, it just
doesn’t count towards the parking requirement. Ms. Carver asked how many spaces are required and how
many will be mitigated. Mr. Bendon replied 26 is the requirement. The minimum onsite is 16. We have
P3
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
4
17 on site with the potential additional 6. We would suggest it is not as obstructed as we are thinking.
There are other obstructions like garage doors you have to go through to get to a parking space. It does
come down to a budget consideration. If we add them and have to pay the 38,000 we would be going
backwards.
Mc. McGovern opened the public comment.
1. Barbara Lee, 327 Midland Ave, said the issue I have is 14 units but how many bedrooms. Mr.
Bendon said we haven’t done the final layouts but they will be 3 or 4 bedrooms each. Ms. Lee
said as much as we wish Aspen could be a no parking town many of these units will be a 2 or 3
car unit. Midland is a 16 parking space street and it is maxed out. Many of us are concerned
about the impact of the parking. This neighborhood cannot absorb another 50 parking spaces.
The requirement doesn’t solve the problem. How will you absorb the 50 extra cars on a public
street.
2. Ann Marie McVey said the parking is a huge problem. Our neighborhood is not part of the infill
area but this is infill to the max. The affordable housing is taking the brunt. All of us will be
taking the brunt to maximize the free market units. We will also lose our view plane. The project
is also extending over the property line and not compatible with the overall neighborhood.
3. Helen Phillips 326 Midland said she has been an owner since 1970’s, our parking spaces will be
used by people who are visiting. It doesn’t make sense to me to build this huge development
without parking. The stairs are in a bad location and are ugly to look at.
4. Erick Phillips, ditto on the parking. Asked how many guest parking spaces there are. Mr.
Bendon replied none.
5. Jeff Bestick, 301 Midland Park said I can see the mountains now but the view will be gone when
this is built. He mentioned safety and the driveway will be in a canyon for 6 months of the year if
this is built. Spoke about light pollution. While the project may meet all the requirements is it an
asset to the neighborhood.
6. Steve Hach, said parking issues in the east end have been around long before this application.
There is not enough parking in the neighborhood. The units are not an asset. We are digging a
hole with the parking.
7. Elise Eliott said she objects to the project. Not only will it impact Midland but Park Ave too.
She asked the commission to reject this proposal.
8. Warren Cohen, 55 Smuggler Grove Rd, asked what the developers are needing to have approved.
Concerned with the parking and traffic in the neighborhood. Will only get worse if these
developments go through.
9. Sasha Simple, 821 midland Park Pl, 10 years ago there was no stop sign where current bus stop
is. Complained and a partial stop sign was installed. With snow and cars and bus stop it is very
dangerous and a safety issue.
10. David Harris, 117 Neale, asked who owns the property where the bump out is located. Mr.
Bendon replied we do. Mr. Harris said staff represented that the parking meets the code. I take
issue with that since you are asking for a variance. The building is going to be torn down. The
review standard requires certain things to be met. This project has adverse impact including
shading. There are excessive impacts and it doesn’t meet the code because the review criteria to
reconstruct require the demolition code be met. Staff recommendation of approval says based on
feedback from Jan 22 and additional amenities staff recommends approval. There were a lot of
things that didn’t meet the code form the 1st hearing. As proposed the amount of development on
the site and the parking within the setbacks and the burden is placed on neighboring properties.
Going further into the setback increases the nonconformities. Approving this application is not
consistent with the code. I’m not opposed to this just do it right.
11. Cindy Houben, Midland Park Place, ditto, this really is taking a small lot and placing way to
much on it. It is too much of a burden to the rest of the community. Do the right thing and don’t
allow poor planning to take place.
P4
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
5
12. Dennis Wolcott, manager of midland park place. We have 37 units and 72 bedrooms, we have a
parking place for every bedroom and 12 guest spaces. We do have a serious parking issue with
this plan. The road will be shaded and is at a 5% grade. There will be a safety issue.
13. Jane Demar said the street is not safe in its current condition and agrees with the safety issue.
14. Shale Johnson, lives at Midland Park. Likes the non conformity of the east end. Would like to
see that kept in mind in the design. Agrees with everything else that has been said.
Mr. Larimar said he received letters from Carrie Brooks, Greg Mcpherson, Marcia Corbin, Midland park
Home owners board and Carrie brooks.
Ms. Phelan said there is an existing building with 8 units proposed for demolition. When a building that
has housed local working residents is proposed to be redeveloped we require mitigation. The path they
chose is to replace the units as deed restricted housing. Once provided they can develop with up to 8 free
market units with the intent of meeting height, setbacks and parking. That is where we are getting the 14
total units. It is a final review by the P&Z commission. There are a few requests. The existing building
contains some non conformities. They are asking to replace an existing non conforming building. It is an
allowed request. Due to some of the historic and finish grade there is a requirement to some of the
affordable housing units where the finish floor is required to be at or above grade. It is a technical review
where two of the units don’t meet the 50%. That is one of the requests. With the parking there is a 5 foot
minimal setback. Some of the parking is within the setback. It is allowed through a site specific approval
by the board. Those are the big reviews.
Mr. Walterscheid said council and staff went through a code rewrite last year. This board doesn’t make
parking legislation. Council is the avenue to change parking. While we can talk about parking related to
this project to change parking for your neighborhood requires this amount of attention at a council level.
Ms. Phelan said this project is locked into the standards at the time of the application. Even changing the
code would not affect this application.
Ms. McGovern closed the public comment.
Mr. Bendon stated the number of affordable housing units is 8. Ann Marie mentioned 5. There are 3
legacy tenants that would be rehoused.
Commissioner discussion
Mr. Mesirow said from the last meeting, conceptually this is a really important project. Parking is
something we are learning about. We are not reviewing the other projects. Looking at this project from
the last time I was clear on my position. The applicants made significant strides with the additions. I
could have and will continue to vote yes on it. I prefer the side entrance for the stairs, option B. It is less
of an impediment for the neighbors.
Mr. Marcoux said he also prefers option B as well. He loves the underground storage. He is fine with the
size of the roof deck. He has concerns with the CMP during construction to mitigate the construction
impacts.
Mr. Dupps said this project meets the parking. I think zone parking needs to happen in the east end.
Council needs to take responsibility for it. We don’t have control over it. I supported the project last time
and continue to support it. Option B for the stairs.
Mr. Marcus said there are legitimate concerns and frustrations I am hearing. No one here wants to
discount those. This is not the right venue for those concerns, condition of the street, stop sign, what the
code requirement for parking is, monitoring of the parking, enforcement of parking. My concern is it is
not relevant to this application and this isn’t the right venue for those concerns. There are less compelling
concerns for me including the view plane. There are codes with height limits and densities. There has to
be some level of understanding and respect for this is what the code is. When there is legitimate
frustrations there has to be some level of standard that people can depend upon. There is a young
generation of people that has no where to live. While I respect there are people who bought homes 30
years ago things are going to have to change regarding density. Things are naturally going to change.
Historically Aspen has a hard time for that. There will be 8 new residents that will be affordable.
Additionally, parking will need to be figured out.
P5
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
6
Mr. Mesirow said he would allow the stacked parking to be allowed in the exception.
Ms. Carver said she thinks the developers have bent over backwards to make this building work. It is a
better building than it was. APCHA is in support of it. Everyone wants more affordable housing in this
community. I cannot vote for this because it doesn’t meet the setbacks. Parts of it are over the property
line. We are working so hard to change something that isn’t right. I don’t think we should do it.
Mr. Walterscheid said he left here at the first hearing in favor. I think I’m going to side more closely with
Ruth. Because it is technically a demo it needs to conform. I’m held to that standard and leaning against
this. For the demo and dimensional variance. Exhibit F clearly outlines a few things that aren’t met.
Ms. McGovern said she is really happy to see the additional amenities but they didn’t tip me over the
edge. This is a full demo it should come in to compliance. There is enough space to build the 8 units and
get a free market project.
Mr. Marcoux said I’m for it. We asked you to make some changes and you did it. APCHA is for it. My
concern is in getting the project done.
Ms. Phelan said we would do drawings that show the stair.
Mr. Bendon said they have some changes to the wording of the resolution. Page 3 of the resolution
dimensional variance for south setback, Section 3 notes that there are 3 legacy tenants we’ve talked about.
Page 4, Subsection D talks about 8 units with storage up above, the foot print above space 1 and 5 are
smaller than these dimensions because they don’t have as much space. Ms. Phelan said to note for 1 and
5 reduced dimension. Section 4 talks about free market housing, the application shows a lay out with
kitchen and bedrooms they need to go through the design process, the internal layout needs to change.
Ms. Phelan stated we would remove the bedroom count. Mr. Bendon said Section 5 non conforming
structures and easements, they would like the 2nd sentence to say unless the encroachments are removed.
Section 7 page 6, encroachments to south and west parking, same language as above. Section 9, repeats
former comment. Number 6 overhead storage same comment for 1 and 5. Last paragraph talks about
building permit having to be canceled and withdrawn and all fees not refunded. Ask to allow that to
default to whatever policy is. Ms. Phelan said the director asked for that to be included. Mr. Bendon said
Section 12 – parking, repeating to ask to have mechanical lift spaces count. Ms. Phelan said the code
doesn’t allow that. Mr. Bendon said it mentions 4 parking spaces there are actually 5. The code allows
us to provide additional TIA points to provide mitigation for up to 1 space. Section 15 – EH review for
trash and recycling – from our standpoint we think we met it with Liz.
Mr. Dupps moved to approve Resolution #2, Series of 2019 for Aspen Hills, Growth Management and
associated reviews with amendments and option B for stairs; seconded by Mr. Marcus. Roll call vote.
Commissioners Mesirow, yes; Carver, no; Marcoux, yes; Dupps, yes; Waltersheid, no; Marcus, yes;
McGovern, no. Motion carried 4 to 3.
Wireless Regulations – Code Amendment Referral
Paul Schultz, IT, told the commission wireless infrastructure globally is evolving rapidly. The goal is
to have the best possible service with the least amount of impact. The worst case scenario is
unsightly impact. Often work is performed by the lowest priced contractor. Typically, this means
densification. Small cell antennas have wireless infrastructure and involves digging and trenching.
Best case involves camouflaging and stealthing to make them look like they fit within the building.
There are a variety of ways to conceal in light poles and around them. Another example for dense
and small geographic areas are underground. There are also other creative camouflage solutions.
These are coming and a push from federal and state regulations. Ideally, we can make this the least
worst because it is coming. We can’t prohibit carriers from not providing services. We can co host
infrastructure. We want to have the best wireless service with minimal impact.
Ms. McGovern asked can we say how many can go in a certain area. Andrea Bryan, assistant city
attorney, said so far we’ve seen at least one provider has shown a general location. There is a
requirement they be 600 feet apart. Jessica Garrow, community development, said a block length in
P6
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
7
Aspen is 270 feet. It is about 2 full block lengths. Mr. Schultz said where the carriers are today is
4G. That continues to evolve. 5G is a new set of standards. In the future 4 G will still be there but 5
G is coming. Mr. Marcoux asked are you anticipating pushback from the community with health
related concerns. Ms. Bryan said that is what is driving a lot of this. State law changed in late 2017
and creates a use by right for small cell facilities in any zone districts. It also shortens the time frame
in which we have to act within 90 days. It gives them the right to locate or co locate on city
infrastructure in our right of way’s. Mr. Schultz said all these devices create electromagnetic
radiation. 5 G moves to different wavelengths. It has prompted people to look at this technology.
The FCC provides guidelines on that. Ms. Bryan said the new FCC rules did prohibit municipalities
from using health concerns from regulating small cells. We have some parameters where we can
regulate other aspects like design. She said a small cell is defined as something that can fit within
three cubic feet. Mr. Mesirow said there are three separate issues being discussed; the health
concerns, aesthetic concerns and the efficacy of it. Mr. Schultz said there is coverage and capacity.
There is already coverage problems here. I would like to think the commercial interests would drive
them to improve both coverage and capacity. 4G is evolving and advancing and getting better. I
think us having worse wireless coverage in town will probably be minimal. I would like to think it is
going the other way. Ms. Garrow asked what level of oversight does P&Z want to see on this. Ms.
Bryan said we are required to act on an application within 90 days. The new federal rules require a
90 day shot clock of the date in which the application is submitted for a new stand alone facility. We
have 90 days to act and 60 days for facilities co located within a right of way. We are limited on the
permitted fees in which we can charge. We also can’t materially inhibit deployment. We have to be
reasonable and no more burdensome to other types of infrastructure. We have a pretty strict land use
code and that also apply to this. Most of the review for small cell facilities has to be administrative.
Requests for locating on historic buildings may still be subject to HPC review but they would have to
act within this time frame. A lot of communities for locating in the right of way cities have done
master licensing agreements where they come up with guidelines and approved designs with the
various providers and basically agree this is what the designs would look like. Ms. Garrow said what
we would like to talk about is not the stuff in the right of way or on city buildings but ones located on
private property. We can’t really deny these things. We can set up some parameters about distance
and specific locations on a building about roof top setback and maybe some design elements. Those
seem like administrative type things that staff could do but there is maybe a way to incentivize certain
types of deployment over others. As a board, do you want to see something knowing you are going
to have to say yes to it or do you want us to do it as an administrative review. Mr. Dupps replied
administratively. Mr. Marcoux said it is here he just wants to make sure the providers are separated
from the city. Ms. McGovern said she would like to see the design guidelines but would like it
handled administratively. Ms. Carver said it sounds like controlled compliance. Mr. Mesirow said he
would prefer the aesthetics as invisible as can be for a pedestrian but not to inhibit the efficacy. Ms.
Garrow showed examples of residential deployments including fake chimneys. From a design
perspective she asked about allowing these types of things. Ms. McGovern asked can they be
screened like we screen other mechanical equipment. Ms. Garrow replied absolutely. We already
have pretty strict regulations for setbacks on roofs and height restrictions. Mr. Walterscheid said they
should follow the same rules. Ms. Garrow said we will go back and talk about what type of distance
requirement we can and should have for private property. Ms. Carver asked what the process would
be. Ms. Bryan said we would have a master licensing agreement. The provider would submit an
application with the community development department. They would do an administrative review to
check the boxes to make sure it met the requirements of the master licensing agreement and the
aesthetic requirements of our code. They would then get the approval. The current height in the
code, and we expect to get some pushback from the carriers, is 25 feet. Mr. Dupps moved to extend
the meeting until 7:17; seconded by Mr. Mesirow. All in favor, motion carried. Ms. Garrow said
what she heard is whatever we can within legal bounds. Clearly communicate that it is not the city
that we are responding to the carriers. Camouflage as much as possible and follow the current code
regulations in regard to other types of mechanical equipment. Mr. Marcoux asked if there is a city
that has already deployed this. Mr. Schultz said Sacramento and Huston have somewhat deployed but
P7
IV.A.
Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 5, 2019
8
a full deployment does not exist. Ms. McGovern asked what happens if we go live with this and it is
clear we made a mistake. Ms. Garrow said we met with council and requested money for the design
guideline process. They supported that. We think this will get us through the first period of time.
We can change the review process if it is clear it is not working. Ms. Garrow said we will do some
site visits to manufacturers of light poles.
At 7:12 p.m. Mr. Mesirow moved to adjourn; seconded by Mr. Dupps. All in favor, motion carried.
Linda Manning
City Clerk
P8
IV.A.
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Kevin Rayes, Planner
THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director
RE: Ranger Station Lot 4
MEETING DATE: February 19, 2019
APPLICANT:
Forest Lookout II, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
Joseph Spears, S2 Architects
LOCATION:
Ranger Station Lot 4
CURRENT ZONING:
Moderate-Density Residential (R-6)
SUMMARY:
The applicant is requesting variations
Residential Design Standards for
development of two detached single-
dwellings.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning
Commission approve the following
Residential Design Standard Variation
requests:
1. Dwelling B:
· Building Orientation
· Articulation of Building Mass
· Build-to Requirement
· One Story Element
· Entry Connection
· Entry Porch
· Principle Window
MEMORANDUM
Planning & Zoning Commission
Kevin Rayes, Planner
Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director
Ranger Station Lot 4- RDS Variations
February 19, 2019
s from
Residential Design Standards for the
-family
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning
following
ariation
Articulation of Building Mass
Figure 1: Site Location
N.
8th
Str
eet
W. Smuggler Street
Page 1 of 7
W. Smuggler Street
P9
VI.A.
Page 2 of 7
REQUEST OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: The Applicant is requesting the following
approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission:
· Residential Design Standards, Variation as pursuant to Section 26.410.020[C]. of the Land Use Code.
A variation to a Residential Design Standard shall be considered at a public hearing before the
Planning and Zoning Commission who may approve, approve with conditions or deny the proposal
based on the following review standards:
1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as
indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statement in
Section 26.410.010.A.1-3; or
2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
BACKGROUND: Ranger Station Lot 4 is located in the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) zone district and
within the Aspen Infill Area. A portion of a 20-foot access and utility easement (a previously vacated alley)
runs along the north of Lot 4 from the front to the rear; it also serves Lots 1 -3 to the north. Additionally, the
property is encumbered with a portion of the vehicular easement on the north of the property (this is within
the required minimum side yard of 15 feet) as well as an additional utility easement and the Si Johnson ditch
easement creates a greater rear yard setback requirement than the typical 10 feet. The lot is 11,655-square
feet with a minimum lot width of 70.31 ft. and depth of 143.79 ft.. Since the lot size is greater than 9,000 sq.
ft., it allows for the development of a single-family residence, a duplex residence, or two detached
residences. The applicant plans to develop the lot with two detached residences. In the West End, typical
lot size is based on a townsite lot (30’by 100’). A parcel containing three townsite lots can accommodate two
detached residences, this provides a standard dimension of a 90 ft. lot width and 100 ft. lot depth but this is
not the dimensions of the subject lot.
Figure 2: Platted Lot 4, Ranger Station subdivision
P10
VI.A.
With adoption of the updated Residential Design Standards, the intent was to provide increased flexibility
for properties to design a building that contributes to the streetscape. While the new code does not give
direction to architectural style, it does demand the adherence to the intent of the standards.
the standards were crafted to “ensure a strong connection between residences and the streets; ensure
buildings provide articulation to break up bulk and mass; and preserve historic neighborhood scale and
character.”
Each standard provides options in meet
categories of “flexible” or “non-flexible.”
administratively, if the design is inconsistent with the standard but meets the intent sta
standard by an alternative means. Non
required to be met by complying with one of the provided options.
required to be reviewed by a board. As both flexible and non
requests have been combined to be heard solely by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Figure 3: Site Plan
REVIEWS:
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIATION
standards. Unit A’s front façade addresses 8
closest to the street. Unit B is located on the eastern side or rear of the lot. Its front façade is
address the access easement to the north.
chapter is the “street facing (in this case 8
building entry.” As noted earlier in the memo, to grant a variation, the Commission must determine that
either standard is met:
1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as
indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statement in
Section 26.410.010.A.1-3; or
With adoption of the updated Residential Design Standards, the intent was to provide increased flexibility
operties to design a building that contributes to the streetscape. While the new code does not give
direction to architectural style, it does demand the adherence to the intent of the standards.
the standards were crafted to “ensure a strong connection between residences and the streets; ensure
buildings provide articulation to break up bulk and mass; and preserve historic neighborhood scale and
Each standard provides options in meeting the stated intent. Additionally, the standards are divided into
flexible.” Variations to the Flexible standards may be reviewed
administratively, if the design is inconsistent with the standard but meets the intent sta
Non-flexible standards are considered core design standards and are
required to be met by complying with one of the provided options. Variations to Non-
d. As both flexible and non-flexible standards are being requested, the
requests have been combined to be heard solely by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
ANDARD VARIATIONS: As proposed, Unit B requires variations to several of
front façade addresses 8th Street to the west and is on the western side of the property,
closest to the street. Unit B is located on the eastern side or rear of the lot. Its front façade is
address the access easement to the north. The Front Facade as defined in the Residential Design Standards
chapter is the “street facing (in this case 8th Street) exterior face of the building that contains the primary
earlier in the memo, to grant a variation, the Commission must determine that
1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as
indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statement in
Page 3 of 7
With adoption of the updated Residential Design Standards, the intent was to provide increased flexibility
operties to design a building that contributes to the streetscape. While the new code does not give
direction to architectural style, it does demand the adherence to the intent of the standards. Specifically,
the standards were crafted to “ensure a strong connection between residences and the streets; ensure
buildings provide articulation to break up bulk and mass; and preserve historic neighborhood scale and
ing the stated intent. Additionally, the standards are divided into
Variations to the Flexible standards may be reviewed
administratively, if the design is inconsistent with the standard but meets the intent statement of the
flexible standards are considered core design standards and are
-flexible standards are
flexible standards are being requested, the
requests have been combined to be heard solely by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
to several of the design
Street to the west and is on the western side of the property,
closest to the street. Unit B is located on the eastern side or rear of the lot. Its front façade is proposed to
The Front Facade as defined in the Residential Design Standards
Street) exterior face of the building that contains the primary
earlier in the memo, to grant a variation, the Commission must determine that
1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as
indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statement in
P11
VI.A.
Page 4 of 7
2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
Unit B: Unit B requires approval of seven variations: (1) Building Orientation (Flexible standard), (2)
Articulation of Building Mass (Non-flexible standard), (3) Build-to Requirement (Flexible standard), (4) One
Story Element (Flexible standard), (5) Entry Connection (Non-flexible standard), (6) Entry Porch height
(Flexible standard), and (7) Principal window (Flexible standard). All of these are required if the front of Unit
B faces the ‘alley’ rather than 8th Street.
· The Building Orientation is proposed on the north side of the residence which faces the ‘alley’ rather
than 8th Street. This request is of primary importance is it relates to the need and potential granting of
subsequent variation requests. The intent of the standard is to “establish a relationship between buildings
and streets to create an engaging streetscape and discourage isolation of homes from the surrounding
neighborhood. The placement of buildings should seek to frame street edges physically or visually. Buildings
should be oriented in a manner such that they are a component of the streetscape, which consists of the
street itself and the buildings that surround it. Building orientation should provide a sense of interest and
promote interaction between buildings and passersby. Building orientation is important in all areas of the
city, but is particularly important in the Infill Area where there is a strong pattern of buildings that are
parallel to the street. Designs should prioritize the visibility of the front façade from the street by designing
the majority of the front façade to be parallel to the street or prominently visible from the street. Front
facades, porches, driveways, windows, and doors can all be designed to have a strong and direct
relationship to the street.”
Clearly, the intent of the standard is to provide buildings that are oriented parallel to the street. Ideally, with
two detached houses on a lot, the orientation would be side by side and parallel to the street. In this case,
the lot width adjacent to 8th Street is approximately 70 feet. Based on the lot size, the minimum side yard
setback is 15 feet on each side and a minimum of 10 feet is required between buildings, leaving a width of 30
feet for two buildings to be located side by side. The private access easement along the north of the lot is
not a street but is considered an alley which is defined as a “public or private way for vehicular traffic having
less width than a street and used as a secondary access to abutting property, normally at the rear.” The ‘alley’
provides secondary access for four out of the five lots in the Ranger Station subdivision.
Staff Comment: Typical lots in the west end that can accommodate two detached residences have a greater lot
width and less depth than this lot, which assists in providing an orientation towards the street. With a narrower
lot, the maximum building width when considering side yard setbacks and a distance between buildings
requirement is 30 feet total for both dwellings. Divided by 2 houses, that would make for rather narrow homes.
Unit A is proposed to have a facade that is parallel to 8th Street and meets the residential design standards. Due
to the unconventional lot width, staff can support an orientation for unit B that faces the ‘alley’ due to the
unusual site constraint.
If P&Z is supportive of the rear house being oriented towards the ‘alley’, the subsequent variations being
requested are a result of the ‘alley’ orientation and should be supported. In the alternative only one unit is
required to meet the design standards if the building is considered a duplex (both units attached).
· The Articulation of Building Mass design requirement has three options to meet the standard by
providing a maximum sidewall depth of 50 ft., a one-story connecting element, or increased setback at the
rear of the building in the form of a one story step down with the intent to “reduce the overall perceived
mass and bulk of buildings on a property”. Unit B is designed with a maximum sidewall depth of 59.8 feet
P12
VI.A.
from the façade facing 8th Street to the rear wall as shown in
three design options provided. Per Code Section 26.410.030.
only 50 feet deep. However, if the P&Z is comfortable with the rear building oriented towards the alley,
maximum depth from the ‘alley’ front façade to the r
Staff Comment: Again, if the P&Z is comfortable with the orientation of the building towards the ‘alley’, Unit B
would meet the maximum depth allowance from the ‘alley
need a technical variation from Articulation of Building Mass. When looking at the site plan as
meets the maximum sidewall depth of 50 feet or less and there is 10 feet between the two buil
the minimum width permitted for a one story ground level conn
Although two masses, the separation between each residence breaks up the mass on site.
granting of the variation.
Figure 4: ‘Front’ Façade, Unit B
· The Build to Requirement design requirement seeks to establish front facades that are consistently
“close to and parallel to the street”, in this case 8
5 feet of the minimum front yard setback.
presence and integration along the streetscape.
side by side orientation for both dwellings
portion of Unit B is located within 5 feet of the setback along the ‘alley’.
Staff Comment: For both units to meet this standard as two
would be required parallel to 8th Street, leaving for two very narrow buildings
variation for Building Orientation and subsequently support
Unit A will meet the standard along 8th Street
streetscape, while unit B will provide presence along the ‘alley’.
· One Story Element is a design standard that encourages pedestrian related artchitectural elements. As
noted in the standard, “designs should utilize street
to the rear wall as shown in Figure 3, which is the closest option
. Per Code Section 26.410.030.(B), the maximum sidewall depth
However, if the P&Z is comfortable with the rear building oriented towards the alley,
front façade to the rear of the building is approximately 40 feet.
Staff Comment: Again, if the P&Z is comfortable with the orientation of the building towards the ‘alley’, Unit B
would meet the maximum depth allowance from the ‘alley’ façade to the rear wall of the building but would
need a technical variation from Articulation of Building Mass. When looking at the site plan as
sidewall depth of 50 feet or less and there is 10 feet between the two buil
one story ground level connector to break up the mass of a single building
Although two masses, the separation between each residence breaks up the mass on site.
design requirement seeks to establish front facades that are consistently
“close to and parallel to the street”, in this case 8th Street, and requires 60% of the front façade to be within
front yard setback. The intent of the standard is to ‘provi
presence and integration along the streetscape. Unit A meets this requirement along 8
dwellings, Unit B cannot meet this standard. However,
is located within 5 feet of the setback along the ‘alley’.
For both units to meet this standard as two standalone residences, a side by side configuration
Street, leaving for two very narrow buildings of 15 feet each
variation for Building Orientation and subsequently supports the variation needed for the Build
Unit A will meet the standard along 8th Street providing a strong physical presence and integration
streetscape, while unit B will provide presence along the ‘alley’.
is a design standard that encourages pedestrian related artchitectural elements. As
“designs should utilize street-facing architectural elements, such as porches, that
Page 5 of 7
which is the closest option of the
the maximum sidewall depth should be
However, if the P&Z is comfortable with the rear building oriented towards the alley, the
ear of the building is approximately 40 feet.
Staff Comment: Again, if the P&Z is comfortable with the orientation of the building towards the ‘alley’, Unit B
façade to the rear wall of the building but would
need a technical variation from Articulation of Building Mass. When looking at the site plan as a whole, Unit A
sidewall depth of 50 feet or less and there is 10 feet between the two buildings, which is
to break up the mass of a single building.
Although two masses, the separation between each residence breaks up the mass on site. Staff supports
design requirement seeks to establish front facades that are consistently
Street, and requires 60% of the front façade to be within
‘provide a strong physical
Unit A meets this requirement along 8th Street but without
However, a predominant
standalone residences, a side by side configuration
of 15 feet each. Staff supports the
e Build-to Requirement.
a strong physical presence and integration along the
is a design standard that encourages pedestrian related artchitectural elements. As
facing architectural elements, such as porches, that
P13
VI.A.
Page 6 of 7
imitate those of historic Aspen residential buildings. Buildings should provide visual evidence or
demarcation of the stories of a building to relate to pedestrians.” Both buildings provide a one story
element: Unit A with a one story element adjacent to 8th Street and Unit B’s facing the ‘alley’.
Staff Comment: Both buildings provide a one story element, one facing 8th Street (Unit A) and Unit B element
along the alley. Both the features demarcate the division between ground and upper stories and provide
pedestrian related elements on the buildings. Again, if the commisison is comfortable with the orientation of
Unit B towards the ‘alley’, then a variation is supported as a one story element is provided on the building.
Entry Connection, Entry Porch Height and Principal Window are various aesthetic features to be included
along the front façade of residential dwellings as outlined in the Residential Design Standards. These
standards include a One-Story Element, an Entry Connection, and Fenestration. While the applicant has
included these features in the proposed design, they do not comply with the Residential Design Standards as
they are not located along the 8th Street facing façade of dwelling B, as the features are oriented towards
Staff Comment: Again, the features are included in Unit B but face the ‘alley’ rather than 8th Street as the
applicant has requested an orientation towards the ‘alley’. Staff supports the orientation request and therefore
supports the incorporation of the architectural features in an alternative manner.
RECOMMENDATION:
The general intent of the design standards are to “to ensure a strong connection between residences and
streets; ensure buildings provide articulation to break up bulk and mass; and preserve historic neighborhood
scale and character.” The standards encourage “physical and visual relationships between streets, and
residential buildings located along streets”, and “reduce perceived mass and bulk of residential buildings
from all sides”. Building A meets these standards. The applicant is requesting an alternative orientation
towards the ‘alley’ rather than 8th Street while incorporating required design features into the building. Staff
supports the alternative orientation (while incorporating required design elements into the building) as the
lot’s narrower width discourages the applicant’s ability to provide a side by side residence configuration
along 8th Street even though the lot is large enough to accommodate two detached residences. The lot’s
width creates “unusual site specific constraints” as the lot does not follow a typical lot and block pattern
within Aspen’s townsite. The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Zoning
Commission approve the request for the following variations from the Residential Design Standards:
1. Dwelling B:
· Articulation of Building Mass
· Building Orientation
· Build-to Requirement
· One Story Element
· Entry Connection
· Entry Porch
PROPOSED MOTION:
The resolution is written in the affirmative, approving the request.
“I move to approve the Variation requests from the certain design standard for Unit B.”
P14
VI.A.
Page 7 of 7
Attachments:
Exhibit A- Residential Design Standards Review Criteria
Exhibit B- Application
Exhibit C- Addendum to Plan Set, Unit A
P15
VI.A.
Page 1 of 14
RESOLUTION NO. __
(SERIES OF 2019)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIATIONS FOR A PROPERTY
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 4 AS DESCRIBED ON THE AMENDED AND
RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018
IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT PAGE 022 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625, COMMONLY
KNOWN AS LOT 4, TBD EIGHTH STREET, ASPEN CO 81611
Parcel No. 2735-124-28-004
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from
Forest Lookout II, LLC requesting approval for Residential Design Standard Variations for the
property at Lot 4, TBD Eighth Street, Aspen CO 81611; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department Staff reviewed the application
for compliance with the applicable review standards; and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable Land Use Code
standards, the Community Development Director recommended denial of Residential Design
Standard Variations; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and
considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as
identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community
Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public
hearing on February 19, 2019; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the
development proposal meets the applicable review criteria and that the approval of the request is
consistent with the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution
furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission approves Resolution X, Series of
2019, by a X to X (X-X) vote, granting approval of the Residential Design Standard Variations
as identified herein.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission:
Section 1: Residential Design Standard Variation
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the request for Residential Design Standard
variations to orient the front façade of dwelling B towards the Access Easement along the north
P16
VI.A.
Page 2 of 14
of the property (Chapter 26.410.020.C, Variations), varying from the following standards:
Articulation of Building Mass, Building Orientation, Build-To, One Story Element, Entry
Connection, Entry Porch and Principle Window. All other dimensional standards including
height and setbacks shall be met.
Section 2:
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before
the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such site development approvals
and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized
entity.
Section 3:
This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any
action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 4:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
APPROVED by the Commission at its meeting on February 19, 2019.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
______________________________ ___________________________
Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Spencer McKnight, Chair
ATTEST:
____________________________
Jeannine Stickle, Records Manager
Exhibits:
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
P17
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 3 of 14
P18
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 4 of 14
P19
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 5 of 14
P20
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Plans
Page 6 of 14
P21
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 7 of 14
P22
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 8 of 14
P23
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 9 of 14
P24
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 10 of 14
P25
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 11 of 14
P26
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 12 of 14
P27
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Exhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 13 of 14
P28
VI.A.
Exhibit A: Approved Building PlansExhibit A: Approved Building Plans
Page 14 of 14
P29
VI.A.
Exhibit A
Residential Design Standards Review Criteria
Section 26.410.020.D, Residential Design Standard Variation Review Standards.
An application requesting a variation from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and
the deciding board shall find that the variation, if granted would:
1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as
indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statements
in Section 26.410.010.A.1-3., or
2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
Staff Response: RDS review is requested for Unit B, however, Unit B requires approval of seven
variations: (1) Building Orientation (Flexible standard), (2) Articulation of Building Mass (Non-
flexible standard), (3) Build-to Requirement (Flexible standard), (4) One Story Element (Flexible
standard), (5) Entry Connection (Non-flexible standard), (6) Entry Porch height (Flexible standard),
and (7) Principal window (Flexible standard). All of these are required if the front of Unit B faces the
‘alley’ rather than 8th Street.
Should the P&Z find that Unit B has met the criterion to vary the front façade of the building from
the required 8th Street orientation to the access easement orientation, Staff finds that the balance
of the variations may be granted as the design elements are incorporated into the entire building
but in an alternative design approach due to the orientation of the building.
The general intent statement of the Residential Design Standard code section is meant “to ensure a
strong connection between residences and streets…and preserve historic neighborhood scale and
character.” Buildings should “respond to neighboring properties,” by creating “a sense of continuity
through building form and setback along the streetscape.” Overall, Dwelling B’s proposed
orientation is inconsistent with surrounding properties, particularly with Dwelling A which has front
façade orientation to 8th Street. However, it should be noted that standard City and Townsite lots in
the West End neighborhood traditionally retain a 60’ by 100’ lot configuration (two townsite lots).
This traditional lot configuration provides for construction of 1 single family residence which has the
ability to appropriately orient the front the façade towards the street and comply with this building
orientation RDS standard. When a duplex or two detached residence are developed on a lot the
traditional minimum lot size is 90’ by 100’ (or of a greater lot width if the lot is larger).
The Ranger Station lots do not mimic traditional City and Townsite lot configurations and were
subdivided without the benefit of the City subdivision process. Lot 4 has a lot configuration of 70’ by
~143’ (and greater), is non-traditional when compared to other City Townsite lots. Given its lot size,
the parcel has the ability to construct 2 detached residences. This non-traditional lot configuration
provides the ability for two side by side houses to be a total of 30 feet wide, as the minimum side
yard setback is 15 feet on each side and a minimum of 10 feet is required between buildings. This
creates an interior wall to wall width of less than 15 feet for each unit, which is quite narrow.
Dwelling A is appropriately oriented to 8th Street while Dwelling B cannot reasonably comply this
this requirement and access easement orientation is proposed. Staff feels that the subject lot’s
P30
VI.A.
Exhibit A
Residential Design Standards Review Criteria
configuration is a constraint that lends the ability for the P&Z to make a finding that Dwelling B be
oriented to the access easement and still meet the building orientation intent to maintain a building
relationship to the access easement that will effectively function as a street. Staff finds this
criterion met.
P31
VI.A.
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
DATE: January 4, 2019
PLANNER: Kevin Rayes, 429-2797
PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: Ranger Station Lot 4- RDS Variation
REPRESENTATIVE: Joseph Spears, S2 Architects
DESCRIPTION: The potential applicant is interested in requesting a variation from the Residential Design Standards for
the development of two detached single-family dwellings located on Lot 4 of the Ranger Station, zoned R-6. This lot is
located within the Aspen Infill Area. A 20-foot access and utility easement runs from the front to the rear along the
north of the lot. In the proposed design, dwelling A is located on the west side of the lot and its front façade parallels
8th street to the west. Dwelling B is located on the east side of the lot and its front façade parallels the access easement
to the north. The orientation of the front façade of Dwelling B requires a variation from the following standard:
• 26.410.030.B.2- Building Orientation (Flexible)
Additionally, based on the proposed design, staff is concerned about the dimensions of the front window located on
the second level of Dwelling A. It appears that this window spans more than 10 vertical feet. The dimensions of the
front window of Dwelling A may require a variation from the following standard:
• 26.410.030.E.2, Window Placement (Flexible)
A full RDS review of this application is still required by staff. The applicant may be required to address additional RDS
concerns not listed in this pre-app.
A variation requires review by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. An application requesting a
variation from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall find
the variation, if granted would:
1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standards as indicated in the intent
statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statements in Section 26.410.010.A.1-3; or
2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS:
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.410 Residential Design Standards
26.410.020.C Residential Design Standard Variations
For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below:
Land Use Application Land Use Code
REVIEW BY: Community Development Staff for complete application and administrative review
PUBLIC HEARING: Yes, Planning & Zoning Commission
PLANNING FEES: $3,250 Deposit for 10 hours of staff time (additional or less hours will be billed or
refunded at a rate of $325 per hour)
REFERRAL FEES: None.
TOTAL DEPOSIT: $3,250
P32
VI.A.
APPLICATION CHECKLIST – These items should first be submitted in a paper copy.
Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.
Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).
Applicant’s name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating
the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to action on behalf of the
applicant.
Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of
a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and
encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all
owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements
affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.
An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
HOA Compliance form (Attached).
A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation
showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of
Colorado.
A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the
proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and
relevant land use approvals associated with the property.
Completed copy of the Residential Design Standard Checklist:
https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/View/1697
Written responses to all applicable review criteria.
If the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:
Total deposit for review of the application.
A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format.
Depending on further review of the case, additional items may be requested of the application. Once the
application is deemed complete by staff, the applicant/applicant’s representative will receive an e-mail requesting
submission of an electronic copy of the complete application and the deposit. Once the deposit is received, the
case will be assigned to a planner and the land use review will begin.
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current
zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate.
The summary does not create a legal or vested right.
P33
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL LAND USE PACKET
Attached is an Application for review of Development that requires Land Use Review pursuant to
The City of Aspen Land Use Code: Included in this package are the following attachments:
1.Development Application Fee Policy, Fee Schedule and Agreement
to Pay Application Fees Form
2.Land Use Application Form
3.Dimensional Requirements Form (if required)
4.HOA Compliance Form
5.Development Review Procedure
All Application are reviewed based on the criteria established in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. Title 26 of
the Aspen Municipal Code is available at the City Clerk’s Office on the second floor of City Hall and on the internet
at www.cityofaspen.com, City Departments, City Clerk, Municipal Code, and search Title 26.
We require all applicants to hold a Pre-Application Conference with a Planner in the Community Development
Department so that the requirements for submitting a complete application can be fully described. This
meeting can happen in person or by phone or e-mail. Also, depending upon the complexity of the
development proposed, submitting one copy of the development application to the Case Planner to determine
accuracy, inefficiencies, or redundancies can reduce the overall cost of materials and Staff time.
Please recognize that review of these materials does not substitute for a complete review of the Aspen Land Use
Regulations. While this application package attempts to summarize the key provisions of the Code as they apply
to your type of development, it cannot possibly replicate the detail or the scope of the Code. If you have
questions which are not answered by the materials in this package, we suggest that you contact the staff
member assigned to your case, contact Planner of the Day, or consult the applicable sections of the Aspen Land
Use Code.
P34
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
Land Use Review Fee Policy
The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is
collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted.
A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of
staff time to process. Review fees for other City Departments reviewing the application (referral departments) will also be
collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative – meaning an application with multiple flat fees must be pay the sum of
those flat fee. Flat fees are not refundable.
A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff time is required.
Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on the case in
addition to the case planner. Deposit amount may be reduces if, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the
project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates.
A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-application conference by the case planner. Hourly
billing shall still apply.
All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for Planning and
referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of Aspen. Applications will
not be accepted for processing without the required fee.
The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the processing of a
land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the applicant’s request. The
applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of an application by the Community
Development Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a
project review shall be billed to the applicant with no additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an
application takes less time than provided for by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited
fee to the applicant. Fees shall be due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval.
Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final and recordation of
approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purpose of billing. Upon conceptual approval all billing shall be
reconciled and past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final review. Final review shall
require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final submission. Upon final approval all billing shall be again reconciled
prior to the Director accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation.
The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30 or more
days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 days or more past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.7% per month. An unpaid invoice o f
120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information
is public domain.
All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and plats. The City
will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already accepted, and unpaid invoice
of 90 days or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance of a stop work order until full payment is
made.
The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application
for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g.
a contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties.
P35
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and
I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2017, review fees for Land Use applications and
payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property
owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application.
For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are
non-refundable.
$.___________flat fee for __________________. $.____________ flat fee for _____________________________
$.___________ flat fee for __________________. $._____________ flat fee for _____________________________
For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not
possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that addit ional
costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete
processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project
consideration, unless invoices are paid in full.
The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to
the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of
an invoice by the City for such services.
I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay
the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not
render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I
agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly
rates hereinafter stated.
$________________ deposit for_____________ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
$________________ deposit for _____________ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the
deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
City of Aspen:
________________________________
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director
Signature: _________________________________________
PRINT Name: _______________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________City Use:
Fees Due: $_______Received $_______
Case #___________________________
Please type or print in all caps
Address of Property: ______________________________________________
Property Owner Name: __________________________ Representative Name (if different from Property Owner)_______________________
Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Contact info for billing: e-mail: _______________________________________ Phone: __________________________
Michael H Brown
Manager
P36
VI.A.
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
LAND USE APPLICATION
Project Name and Address:_________________________________________________________________________
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) _____________________________
APPLICANT:
Name: ______________________________________________________________________________________________
Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone #: ___________________________ email: __________________________________
REPRESENTIVATIVE:
Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________
Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone#: _____________________________ email:___________________________________
Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions
Review: Administrative or Board Review
Have you included the following?FEES DUE: $ ______________
Pre-Application Conference Summary
Signed Fee Agreement
HOA Compliance form
All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary
Required Land Use Review(s):
Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields:
Net Leasable square footage _________ Lodge Pillows______ Free Market dwelling units ______
Affordable Housing dwelling units_____ Essential Public Facility square footage ________
P37
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM
Project and Location ____________________________________________________________________
Applicant: ____________________________________________________________________________
Gross Lot Area: __________Zone Zone District: _______ Net Lot Area: __________
Please fill out all relevant dimensions
Single Family and Duplex Residential
Existing Allowed Proposed
1) Floor Area (square feet)
2) Maximum Height
3) Front Setback
4) Rear Setback
5) Side Setbacks
6) Combined Side Setbacks
7) % Site Coverage
8) Minimum distance between buildings
Proposed % of demolition ______
Commercial
Proposed Use(s)____________________
Existing Allowed Proposed
1) FAR (Floor Area Ratio)
2) Floor Area (square feet)
3) Maximum Height
4) Off-Street Parking Spaces
5) Second Tier (square feet)
6) Pedestrian Amenity (square feet)
Proposed % of demolition ______
Existing non-conformities or encroachments:
Variations requested:
**Please refer to section 26.575.020 for information on how to calculate Net Lot Area
Multi-family Residential
Existing Allowed Proposed
1) Number of Units
2) Parcel Density (see 26.710.090.C.10)
3) FAR (Floor Area Ratio)
4) Floor Area (square feet)
4) Maximum Height
5) Front Setback
6) Rear Setback
7) Side Setbacks
Proposed % of demolition ______
Lodge
Additional Use(s)____________________
Existing Allowed Proposed
1) FAR (Floor Area Ratio)
2)Floor Area (square feet)
3)Maximum Height
4) Free Market Residential(square feet)
4) Front setback
5) Rear setback
6) Side setbacks
7) Off-Street Parking Spaces
8) Pedestrian Amenity (square feet)
Proposed % of demolition ______
Complete only if required by the PreApplication checklist
P38
VI.A.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
November 2017 City of Aspen | 130 S. Galena St. | (970) 920-5090
Homeowner Association Compliance Policy
All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association
Compliance Form (this form) certifying the scope of work included in the land use application complies
with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by
the property owner or Attorney representing the property owner.
Property
Owner (“I”):
Name:
Email: Phone No.:
Address of
Property:
(subject of
application)
I certify as follows: (pick one)
□This property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant.
□This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements
proposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association or
covenant beneficiary.
□This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements
proposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners association or
covenant beneficiary.
I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the
applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I
understand that this document is a public document.
Owner signature: _________________________ date:___________
Owner printed name: _________________________
or,
Attorney signature: _________________________ date:___________
Attorney printed name: _________________________
1/7/2019 | 9:21 AM PST
Michael H Brown
P39
VI.A.
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE
1.Attend pre-application conference. During this one-on-one meeting, staff will determine the review process
which applies to your development proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application.
2.Submit Development Application. Based on your pre-application meeting, you should respond to the
application package and submit the requested number of copies of the complete application and the application
and the appropriate processing fee to the Community Development Department.
3.Determination of Completeness. Within five working days of the date of your submission, staff will review the
application, and will notify you in writing whether the application is complete or if additional materials are
required. Please be aware that the purpose of the completeness review is to determine whether or not the
information you have submitted is adequate to review the request, and not whether the information is sufficient
to obtain approval.
4.Staff Review of Development Application. Once your application is determined to be complete, it will be
reviews by the staff for compliance with the applicable standards of the Code. During the staff review stage, the
application will be referred to other agencies for comments. The Planner assigned to your case or the agency may
contact you if additional information is needed or if problems are identified. A memo will be written by the staff
member for signature by the Community Development Director. The memo will explain whether your application
complies with the Code and will list any conditions which should apply if the application is to be approved.
Final approval of any Development Application which amends a recorded document, such as a plat, agreement or
deed restriction, will require the applicant to prepare an amended version of that document for review and
approval by staff. Staff will provide the applicant with the applicable contents for the revised plat, while the City
Attorney is normally in charge of the form for recorded agreements and deed restrictions. We suggest that you
not go to the trouble or expense of preparing these documents until the staff has determined that your
application is eligible for the requested amendment or exemption.
5.Board Review of Application. If a public hearing is required for the land use action that you are requesting,
then the Planning Staff will schedule a hearing date for the application upon determination that the Application is
complete. The hearing(s) will be scheduled before the appropriate reviewing board(s). The applicant will be
required to nail notice (one copy provided by the Community Development Department) to property owners
within 30 feet of the subject property and post notice (sign available at the Community Development Department)
of the public hearing on the site at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date (please see Attachment 6 for
instructions). The Planning Staff will publish notice of the hearing in the paper for land use requests that require
publication.
The Planning Staff will then formulate a recommendation on the land use request and draft a memo to the
reviewing board(s). Staff will supply the Applicant with a copy of the Planning Staff’s memo approximately 5 days
prior to the hearing. The public hearing(s) will take place before the appropriate review boards. Public Hearings
include a presentation by the Planning Staff, a presentation by the Applicant (optional), consideration of public
comment, and the reviewing board’s questions and decision.
(Continued on next page)
P40
VI.A.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
6.Issuance of Development Order. If the land use review is approved, then the Planning Staff will issue a
Development Order which allows the Applicant to proceed into Building Permit Application.
7.Receipt of Building Permit. Once you have received a copy of the signed staff approval, you may proceed to
building permit review. During this time, your project will be examined for its compliance with the Uniform
Building Code. It will also be checked for compliance with applicable provisions of the Land Use Regulations which
were not reviewed in detail during the one step review (this might include a check of floor area ratios, setbacks,
parking, open space and the like). Fees for water, sewer, parks and employee housing will be collected if due. Any
document required to be recorded, such as a plat, deed restriction or agreement, will be reviewed and recorded
before a Building Permit is submitted.
P41
VI.A.
Authorized Agent Letter
Project: Forest Lookout Date: 1-4-19
(Owner – Forest Lookout II, LLC), who owns the property known as Ranger Station Lot #4, Aspen, Colorado
81611, gives authorization for S2 Architects, whose address is 215 N. Monarch Suite G-102, Aspen Colorado
81611, to act as their representative through the process of applying for Residential Design Standards Review and
Land Use Review.
(Owner) Date:
S2 Architects Date:
215 S. Monarch Suite G-102
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970.544.4856
Email: joseph@s2architects.com
1/7/2019 | 9:23 AM PST
P42
VI.A.
Vicinity Map
Project: Forest Lookout – Lot 4 Date: 01-04-19
Address TBD – Aspen, Co Parcel #273512428004
215 S. Monarch Suite G-102
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970.544.4856
Email: joseph@s2architects.com
P43
VI.A.
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Review
Section 26.410.020.B. of the Land Use Code requires an Administrative Review for compliance with the Residential Design Standards (RDS) for
all residential projects, unless otherwise exempted pursuant to Section 26.410.010.C. Exempt projects include:
• An addition or remodel to an existing structure that does not change the exterior of the building
• A remodel of a structure where the alterations proposed change the exterior of the building, but are not addressed by any of the RDS
• A residential unit within a mixed-use building
• A designated historic resource listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. New buildings on a historic landmark
lot are not exempt.
All applicable residential projects shall submit for RDS Administrative Review or Alternative Compliance prior to building permit submittal. An
applicant may choose to apply directly for a variation from the Planning & Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant
to Chapter 26.410.020.C. A pre-application summary will be required for a variation request.
Review Process:
The Community Development Department staff shall review an application for applicability and compliance with Chapter 26.410, Residential
Design Standards. If the application complies with all applicable standards as written, a signed Checklist and stamped plan set shall be provided
to the applicant to be included with building permit submission.
If the application does not comply with one or more applicable standards, an unsigned Checklist and redlined plan set shall be emailed to the
applicant including comments from staff on which standard(s) the application does not comply with and a description of why the standard(s) is
not compliant. The applicant shall be provided the opportunity to revise and resubmit the design in response to the comments. Staff will keep an
application open for 30 days from the date an unsigned Checklist is emailed to the applicant. If after such time no revisions are submitted, the
application will be removed from the review system.
Pursuant to 26.410.020.C, projects that do not meet the criteria for Administrative Review or Alternative Compliance (as determined by staff)
may be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission, or HPC if appropriate, at the applicant’s request. A pre-application summary will be
required for a variation request.
Page 1 of 2P44 VI.A.
Application for RDS Administrative Review:
An application for RDS Administrative Review that IS NOT requesting Alternative Compliance shall be submitted to the Community Development
front desk on a USB drive or CD or emailed to justin.barker@cityofaspen.com. Applicants shall be notified of complete/incomplete application
by email.
An application for RDS Administrative Review shall include the following documents in digital format:
• Proof of ownership (no older than 6 months from submittal date)
• Representative authorization letter from owner
• Vicinity map
• Site improvement survey certified by a registered land surveyor (no older than one year from submittal date)
• Site plan (scaled 24”x36”)
• Floor plans (scaled 24”x36”)
• Elevations (scaled 24”x36”)
• Complete scope of work noting all areas affected by the proposed project
• Complete RDS applicant checklist (attached) addressing how each standard is met with sheet references for each standard
Application for RDS Alternative Compliance:
An application for RDS Alternative Compliance will require a pre-application summary provided by Community Development staff, and shall
be submitted as a Land Use Application. Required application submittal items shall be outlined in the pre-application summary.
Page 2 of 2
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Review
P45VI.A.
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist
Standard Complies Alternative
Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes
B.1.Articulation of Building Mass
(Non-flexible)
B.2.Building Orientation
(Flexible)
B.3.Build-to Requirement
(Flexible)
B.4.One Story Element
(Flexible)
C.1.Garage Access
(Non-flexible)
C.2.Garage Placement
(Non-flexible)
C.3.Garage Dimensions
(Flexible)
Instructions: Please fill out the checklist below, marking whether the proposed design complies with the applicable standard as written or is requesting Alternative Compliance (only
permitted for Flexible standards). Also include the sheet #(s) demonstrating the applicable standard. If a standard does not apply, please mark N/A and include in the Notes section why
it does not apply. If Alternative Compliance is requested for a Flexible standard, include in the Notes section how the proposed design meets the intent of the standard(s). Additional
sheets/graphics may be attached.
Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the
applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review.
Address:
Parcel ID:
Zone District/PD:
Representative:
Email:
Phone:
Page 1 of 2P46 VI.A.
Standard Complies Alternative
Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes
C.4.Garage Door Design
(Flexible)
D.1.Entry Connection
(Non-flexible)
D.2.Door Height
(Flexible)
D.3.Entry Porch
(Flexible)
E.1.Principle Window
(Flexible)
E.2.Window Placement
(Flexible)
E.3.Nonorthogonal Window Limit
(Flexible)
E.4.Lightwell/Stairwell Location
(Flexible)
E.5.Materials
(Flexible)
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist
Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the
applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review.
Page 2 of 2P47 VI.A.
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist
Standard Complies Alternative
Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes
B.1.Articulation of Building Mass
(Non-flexible)
B.2.Building Orientation
(Flexible)
B.3.Build-to Requirement
(Flexible)
B.4.One Story Element
(Flexible)
C.1.Garage Access
(Non-flexible)
C.2.Garage Placement
(Non-flexible)
C.3.Garage Dimensions
(Flexible)
Instructions: Please fill out the checklist below, marking whether the proposed design complies with the applicable standard as written or is requesting Alternative Compliance (only
permitted for Flexible standards). Also include the sheet #(s) demonstrating the applicable standard. If a standard does not apply, please mark N/A and include in the Notes section why
it does not apply. If Alternative Compliance is requested for a Flexible standard, include in the Notes section how the proposed design meets the intent of the standard(s). Additional
sheets/graphics may be attached.
Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the
applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review.
Address:
Parcel ID:
Zone District/PD:
Representative:
Email:
Phone:
Page 1 of 2P48 VI.A.
Standard Complies Alternative
Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes
C.4.Garage Door Design
(Flexible)
D.1.Entry Connection
(Non-flexible)
D.2.Door Height
(Flexible)
D.3.Entry Porch
(Flexible)
E.1.Principle Window
(Flexible)
E.2.Window Placement
(Flexible)
E.3.Nonorthogonal Window Limit
(Flexible)
E.4.Lightwell/Stairwell Location
(Flexible)
E.5.Materials
(Flexible)
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist
Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the
applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review.
Page 2 of 2P49 VI.A.
215 S. MONARCH STE G-102 ASPEN, CO 81611
P 970.544.4856 WWW.S2ARCHITECTS.COM 1/7/2019 9:59:36 AM01.07.2019
RDS SUBMISSION
FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 4P50 VI.A.
BUILDING OWNER CONTRACTOR
FOREST LOOKOUT II, LLC RA NELSON, LLC
605 W. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2 51 EAGLE ROAD #2
ASPEN, CO 81611 AVON, CO 81620
CONTACT: HARRIS BERLINKSY 970-748-7696
HARRIS@HAYMAX.COM CONTACT: TIM CARPENTER
TCARPENTER@RANELSON.COM
ARCHITECT STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
S2 ARCHITECTS RESOURCE ENGINEERING GROUP
215 S. MONARCH STE. G-102 502 WHITEROCK AVE.
ASPEN, CO 81611 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224
T 970.544.4856 970-349-1216
F 970.544.4856 CONTACT: AUGUST HASZ
CONTACT: JOSEPH SPEARS HASZ@REGINC.COM
JOSEPH@S2ARCHITECTS.COM
SOILS ENGINEER CIVIL ENGINEER
H-P KUMAR SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
5020 COUNTY ROAD 154 502 MAIN ST. #A-3
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 CARBONDALE, CO81623
970-945-7988 970-704-0311
CONTACT: STEVE PAWLAK CONTACT: JESSE SWANN
SPAWLAK@KUMARUSA.COM JSWANN@SOPRISENG.COM
MEP ENGINEER LANDSCAPE DESIGN
RESOURCE ENGINEERING GROUP CONNECT ONE DESIGN
502 WHITEROCK AVE. 123 EMMA RD #200
CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224 CARBONDALE, CO 81623
970-349-1216 970-355-5457
CONTACT: AUGUST HASZ CONTACT: KATIE TABOR
HASZ@REGINC.COM KT@CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NEW CONSTRUCTION OF TWO DETACHED
DWELLINGS ON A VACANT SITE.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 4, RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION, WITHIN
PROTIONS OF BLOCK 9 OT THE ASPEN TOWNSITE, COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO
PARCEL A:
LOT 4 AS DESCRIBED ON THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF
RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 IN PLAT
BOOK 122 AT PAGE 022 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625.
PARCEL B: (EASEMENT INTEREST) AN ACCESS EASEMENT TO PARCEL
A (LOT 4) ACCORDING TO THE “ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT”
CREATED BY THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER
STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT
PAGE 22 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625 AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 1(A)
OF THE SHARED ACCESS WAY AND DRAINAGE SYSTEM USE,
MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENTS AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY 25,
2018 AS RECEPTION
NO. 647627
PHYSICAL ADDRESS(S): ADDRESS NOT YET ESTABLISHED
THE AIA DOCUMENT A201 "GENERAL
CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT FOR
CONSTRUCTION", LATEST EDITION, ARE
HEREBY MADE A PART OF THESE CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS, EXCEPT AS AMENDED HEREIN.
COPIES ARE ON FILE AND ARE AVAILABLE FOR
INSPECTION AT THE OFFICE OF THE
ARCHITECT
THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS CONSIST OF THE
AGREEMENT, THE GENERAL NOTES, THE
SPECIFICATION, AND THE DRAWINGS, WHICH
ARE COOPERATIVE AND CONTINUOUS. WORK
INDICATED OR REASONABLY IMPLIED IN ANY
ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SUPPLIED
AS THOUGH FULLY COVERED IN ALL. ANY
DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT
PARTS SHOULD BE REPORTED TO THE
ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE
AND LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES, AND
SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE HIGHEST
STANDARDS OF CRAFTSMANSHIP BY
JOURNEYMAN OF THE APPROPRIATE TRADES.
THESE DOCUMENTS ARE INTENDED TO
INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT
AND SERVICES REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL
WORK DESCRIBED HEREIN. IT IS THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO
BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
ANY CONDITIONS WHICH WILL NOT PERMIT
CONSTRUCTION ACCORDING TO THE
INTENTIONS OF THESE DOCUMENTS. IT IS THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECT TO
PROVIDE DETAILS AND/OR DIRECTIONS
REGARDING DESIGN INTENT WHERE IT IS
ALTERED BY THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OR
WHERE NEGLECTED IN THE DOCUMENTS.
ANY MATERIALS PROPOSED FOR
SUBSTITUTION OF THOSE SPECIFIED OR
CALLED OUT BY TRADE NAME IN THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE
ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLES WHEN REQUIRED BY
THE ARCHITECT, AND ALL SUCH SAMPLES
SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE ARCHITECT
BEFORE THE WORK IS PERFORMED. WORK
MUST CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED SAMPLES.
ANY WORK WHICH DOES NOT CONFORM SHALL
BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH WORK
WHICH CONFORMS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S
EXPENSE. SUB-CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT
REQUESTS AND SAMPLES FOR REVIEW
THROUGH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WHEN
WORK IS LET TROUGH HIM OR HER. REQUIRED
VERIFICATIONS AND SUBMITTALS TO BE MADE
IN ADEQUATE TIME AS NOT TO DELAY WORK IN
PROGRESS.
ALL REQUESTS FOR SUBSTITUTIONS OF ITEMS
SPECIFIED SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING
TO THE ARCHITECT AND WILL BE CONSIDERED
ONLY IF BETTER SERVICE FACILITATES MORE
ADVANTAGEOUS DELIVERY DATE, OR A
LESSER PRICE WITH CREDIT TO THE CLIENT
WILL BE PROVIDED WITHOUT SACRIFICING
QUALITY, APPEARANCE, AND/OR FUNCTION.
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL THE
ARCHITECT BE REQUIRED TO PROVED THAT A
PRODUCT PROPOSED FOR SUBSTITUTION IS
OR IS NOT OF EQUAL QUALITY TO THE
PRODUCT. SPECIFIED.
ALL WORK SHALL BE ERECT PLUMB AND TRUE-
TO-LINE IN ACCORDANCE WITH BEST
PRACTICES OF THE TRADE AND
MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
THE PARTICULAR ITEM.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO
THE ARCHITECT FOR HIS OR HER REVIEW
WHERE CALLED FOR ANYWHERE IN THESE
DOCUMENTS. REVIEW SHALL BE MADE BY THE
ARCHITECT BEFORE THE WORK IS BEGUN, AND
WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED
SHOP DRAWINGS, SUBJECT TO REPLACEMENT
AS REQUIRED FOR SAMPLES IN PAR. E.,
ABOVE.
THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED
BY THE CONTRACTOR WHEN THERE IS NEED
OF INSPECTION AS REQUIRED BY THE
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE OR BY ANY
LOCAL CODE OR ORDINANCE.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE
FOR THE SAFETY AND CARE OF ADJACENT
PROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE
O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS, AND FOR THE
PROTECTION OF ALL WORK UNTIL IT IS
DELIVERED COMPLETED TO THE OWNER.
ALL DIMENSIONS NOTED TAKE PRECEDENCE
OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. DIMENSIONS
NOTED "N.T.S" DENOTES NOT TO SCALE.
CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND
COORDINATE ALL OPENINGS THOUGH FLOORS,
CELINGS, AND WALLS WITH ALL
ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL,
PLUMBING, AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS.
CONTRACTOR WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY
FOR ITEMS REQUIRING COORDINATION AND
RESOLUTION DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS.
VERIFY ALL SPACE DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN
WITH EXISTING JOB CONDITIONS BEFORE
STARTING CONSTRUCTION.
WHERE WORK IS INSTALLED OR EXISTING
FINISHES ARE DISTURBED, REFINISH SUCH
AREAS TO MATCH EXISTING U.N.O.
CHECK AND VERIFY CONTRAT DOCUMENTS,
FIELD CONDITIONS FOR ACCURACY,
CONFIRMING THAT ALL WORK IS BUILDABLE AS
SHOWN BEFORE PROCEDING WITH
CONSTRUCTION. IF THERE ARE ANY
QUESTIONS REGARDING THESE OR OTHER
COORDINATION QUESTIONS, THE
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
OBTAINING CLARIFICATION WITH THE
ARCHITECT BEFORE PROCEDING WITH WORK
OR RELATED WORK IN QUESTION.
EACH MISCELLANEOUS ITEM OF CUTTING,
PATCHING, OR FITTING IS NOT NECESSARILY
INDIVIDUALLY DESCRIBED HEREIN. NO
SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF CUTTING,
PATCHING, OR FITTING REQUIRED TO
PROPERLY ACCOMODATE THE SCOPE OF
WORK SHALL RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR
FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PERFORM
SUCH WORK AS REQUIRED.
ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE INTENT OF
THE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS ARE TO
BE CLARIFIED WITH THE ARCHITECT BEFORE
ORDERING MATERIALS OR PROCEDING WITH
THE WORK IN QUESTION OR RELATED WORK.
ALL ITEMS ARE NEW UNLESS CALLED OUT AS
"EXISTING".
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
R.
S.
PROJECT
NORTH ARROW
1
1
A
COLUMN GRID
DESIGNATION
#
X-###
#
X-###
X-###
#
X-#####
#
#
101b
1
BUILDING SECTION
REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER
WALL SECTION
REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER
DETAIL
REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER
INTERIOR ELEVATION
REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER
DOOR NUMBER
(IF MORE THAN ONE DOOR PER
ROOM SUB LETTERS ARE USED
REVISION REFERENCE
NEW OR REQUIRED
POINT ELEVATION
EXISTING CONTOURS
ELEVATION ON HIGH SIDE
NEW OR REQUIRED
POINT ELEVATION308320
WINDOW TYPE
BUILDING ASSEMBLY
TAGR1
1i
LEVEL LINE
VIEW NAME
1/8" = 1'-0"23 DRAWING TITLE AND
SCALE
?ST-01 MATERIAL TAG
ROOM NAME
101
ASSEMBLY TITLE AND
SCALE
ROOM NAME AND
NUMBER
23 VIEW NAME
1/8" = 1'-0"
XX#PLUMBING FIXTURE TAG
XX#EQUIPMENT TAG
LIGHT FIXTURE TAGLF-01
Name
Elevation
ABV.ABOVE
A.F.F.ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR
ACC.ACCESS
ACC.FL.ACCESS FLOOR
A.P.ACCES PANEL
ACOUS.ACOUSTICAL
AC.PL.ACOUSTICAL PLASTER
ACT ACOUSTICAL TILE
ACR.PL ACRYLIC PLASTER
ADD.ADDENDUM
ADH.ADHESIVE
ADJUST. ADJUSTABLE
AGG.AGGREGATE
A/C AIR CONDITIONING
ALT.ALTERNATE
ALUM.ALUMINUM
ANCH.ANCHOR, ANCHORAGE
ANOD.ANODIZED
APPROX APPROXIMATE
ARCH.ARCHITECT(URAL)
A.D.AREA DRAIN
ASB.ASBESTOS
ASPH.ASPHALT
A.T.ASPHALT TILE
AUTO. AUTOMATIC
BSMT.BASEMENT
BRG.BEARING
B.PL.BEARING PLATE
BD.JT.BED JOINT
BCH.MK BENCH MARK
BTWN.BETWEEN
BEV.BEVEL(ED)
BITUM.BITUMINOUS
BLK.BLOCK
BLKG BLOCKING
BD.BOARD
B.S.BOTH SIDES
B.W.BOTH WAYS
BTM.BOTTOM
BRK.BRICK
BRZ.BRONZE
BLDG.BUILDING
B.U.R.BUILT UP ROOFING
B.BD.BULLETIN BOARD
CAB.CABINET
CPT.CARPET
CSMT.CASEMENT
C.I.P CAST IN PLACE
C.B.CATCH BASIN
CK.CAULK(ING)
CLG.CEILING
CLG.HT CEILING HEIGHT
CEM.CEMENT
CM CENTIMETER
CER.CERAMIC
C.T.CERMIC TILE
C.M.T.CERAMIC MOSAIC TILE
CH.BD.CHARLK BOARD
CHAM.CHAMFER(ED)
CHRO.CHROMIUM
CLR.CLEAR(ANCE)
CLO.CLOSET
COL.COLUMN
COMB.COMBINATION
COMP'T COMPARTMENT
COMP.COMPOSITION
COMPR.COMPRESS(ED)(ION)
CONC CONCRETE
C.M.U.CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
CONST.CONSTRUCTION
CONTIN.CONTINUOUS
CONT'R CONTRACT/CONTRACTOR
C.L.L.CONTRACT LIMITLINE
C.JT.CONTROL JOINT
CPR.COPPER
C.G.CORNER GUARD
CORR.CORRUGATED
CTR.COUNTER
C.FL.COUNTER FLASHING
CTR.SK.COUNTER SUNK
CRS.COURSE
CU.FT.CUBIC FOOT
CU.YD.CUBIC YARD
DPR.DAMPER
D.P.DAMPPROOFING
D.L.DEAD LOAD
DEMOL.DEMOLISH
DEP.DEPRESS(ED)
DT.DETAIL
DIAG.DIAGONAL
DIAM.DIAMETER
DISPR.DISPENSER
DIV.DIVISION
DR.DOOR
D.H.DOUBLE HUNG
DN.DOWN
D.S.DOWNSPOUT
DRN.BD DRAIN BOARD
D.T.DRAIN TILE
DWR.DRAWER
DWG.DRAWING
D.F.DRINKING FOUNTAIN
D.W.DISHWASHER
EA.FA EACH FACE
E EAST
ELEC.ELECTRIC(AL)
E.P.ELECTRICAL PANELBOARD
E.W.C.ELECTRIC WATER COOLER
EL.ELEVATION
ELEV.ELEVATOR
EMERG.EMERGENCY
ENCL.ENCLOSE(URE)
EQ.EQUAL
EQUIP.EQUIPMENT
ESC.ESCALATOR
EXCAV.EXCAVATE
EXH.EXHAUST
EXIST.EXISTING
EXP.EXPANSION
EXT.EXTERIOR
F.O.FACE OF
F.BD.FIBERBOARD
F.GLS.FIBERGLASS
FIN.FINISH(ED)
FIN.FLR FINISHED FLOOR
F.A.FIRE ALARM
F.BRK.FIRE BRICK
F.E.FIRE EXTINGUISHER
F.E.C.FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET
F.H.S.FIRE HOSE CABINET
F.PL.FIREPLACE
F.P.FIREPROOF
F.R.C.FIRE-RESISTANT COATING
F.RT.FIRE-RETARDANT
FLASH.FLASHING
FLEX.FLEXIBLE
FLR.FLOOR
FLR.C.O FLOOR CLEAN OUT
F.D.FLOOR DRAIN
FLR.PL.FLOOR PLATE
FLUOR.FLUORESCENT
FLR.JT FLOOR JOINT
FOUND.FOUNDATION
FRG.FRAMING
FR.AIR FRESH AIR
F.B.O.FURNISHED BY OTHERS
FUR.FURRED(ING)
FUT.FUTURE
GA.GUAGE
GALV.GALVANIZED
GSKT.GASKET
G.C.GENERAL CONTRACTOR
GL.GLASS
GL.BLK GLASS BLOCK
GL.C.M.U.GLAZED CONC. MAS UNIT
GL.S.T.GLAZED STRUCTURAL TILE
G.B.GRAB BAR
GRT.GROUT
G.W.B.GYPSUM WALL BOARD
GYPC.GYPCRETE
GYP.PL.GYPSUM PLASTER
GYP.T.GYPSUM TILE
HD.BD.HARDBOARD
HDW.HARDWARE
HDWD HARDWOOD
HD.JT.HEAD JOINT
HDR.HEADER
HTG.HEATING
HVAC HEATING/VENTILATION/
AIR CONDITIONING
HVY.D.HEAVY DUTY
HT.HEIGHT
HEX.HEXAGONAL
H.B.HOSE BIBB
H.M.HOLLOW METAL
HORIZ.HORIZONTAL
HR.HOUR
H.W.H.HOT WATER HEATER
INCIN.INCINERATOR
INCL.INCLUDE(ING)
I.D.INSIDE DIAMETER
INSUL.INSULATE(ING)
INT.INTERIOR
INTERM.INTERMEDIATE
INV.INVERT
J.CL.JANITOR CLOSET
JT.JOINT
J.F.JOINT FILLER
JST.JOIST
K.PL.KICK PLATE
KIT.KITCHEN
K.O.KNOCK OUT
LBL.LABEL
LAB LABORATORY
LAM.LAMINATE
LAV.LAVATORY
L.H.LEFT HAND
LGTH.LENGTH
LT.LIGHT
L.C.LIGHT CONTROL
LT.PF.LIGHTPROOF
LT.WT.LIGHT WEIGHT
LMS.LIMESTONE
LTL.LINTEL
M.H.MANHOLE
MFR.MANUFACTURE(ER)
MRB.MARBLE
MAS.MASONRY
M.O.MASONRY OPENING
MAT'L MATERIAL
MAX MAXIMUM
MECH.MECHANICAL
M.C.MEDICINE CABINET
MED.MEDIUM
M.BR.MASTER BEDROOM
MEMB.MEMBRANE
MTL.METAL
M.F.D.METAL FLOOR DECKING
M.R.D.METAL ROOF DECKING
M.THR.METAL THRESHOLD
M METER
MM MILLIMETER
MWK.MILLWORK
MIN.MINIMUM
MIR.MIRROR
MISC.MISCELLANEOUS
MOD.MODULAR
MLDG.MOULDING
MT.MOUNT
MTD.MOUNTED
MOV.MOVE(ABLE)
MULL.MULLION
NAT.NATURAL
N.R.NOISE REDUCTION
N.R.C.NOISE REDUCTION COEFF.
NOM.NOMINAL
NONMET NONMETALLIC
N NORTH
N.I.C.NOT IN CONTACT
N.T.S.NOT TO SCALE
OBS.OBSCURE
O.C.ON CENTER
OPAQ OPAQUE
OPG.OPENING
O.W.JST.OPEN WEB JOIST
OPP.OPPOSITE
OPP.H.OPPOSITE HAND
OPP.S.OPPOSITE SURFACE
O.D.OUTSIDE DIAMETER
O.A.OVERALL
O.H.OVERHEAD
PNT.PAINT
PTD.PAINTED
PNL.PANEL
P.B.PANIC BAR
P.T.DISP.PAPER TOWEL DISPENSER
P.T.REC.PAPER TOWEL RECEPTACLE
PAR.PARALLEL
PKG.PARKING
P.BD.PARTICLE BOARD
PT'N PARTITION
PVMT.PAVEMENT
PERF.PERFORATED
PERIM.PERIMETER
PLAS.PLASTER
P.LAM PLASTIC LAMINATE
PL.PLATE
P.L.F POUNDS PER LINEAL FOOT
PL.GL.PLATE GLASS
PT.POINT
P.V.C.POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
P.T.CONC POST-TENSIONED CONCRETE
P.C.CONC PRECAST CONCRETE
PLYWD.PLYWOOD
P.S.F.POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
P.S.I.POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH
PREFAB PREFABRICATED
PREFIN.PREFINISHED
P.S.CONC PRESTRESSED CONCRETE
P.L.PROPERTY LINE
Q.T.QUARRY TILE
RBBT.RABBET
RAD.RADIUS
REF.REFERENCE/REFER TO
RFL.REFLECT(ED)(IVE)(OR)
REFR.REFRIGERATOR
REG.REGISTER
REINF.REINFORCE(ED)
R.C.P.REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
REM.REMOVE
RES.RESILIENT
RET.RETURN
R.A.RETURN AIR
RVS.REVERSE (SIDE)
REV.REVISION/REVISE
R.H.RIGHT HAND
R.O.W.RIGHT OF WAY
R RISER
RVT.RIVET
RD.ROOF DRAIN
RF.HCH.ROOF HATCH
RFG.ROOFING
RM.ROOM
RO.ROUGH OPENING
RB.RUBBER BASE
RB.T.RUBBER TILE
RB.ST.RUBBLE STONE
SF.GL SAFETY GLASS
SCHED.SCHEDULE
SNT.SEALANT
STG.SEATING
SCTN.SECTION
SHTH.SHEATHING
SHT.SHEET
SH.GL.SHEET GLASS
SHO.SHORE/SHORING
SIM.SIMILAR
SKYLT.SKYLIGHT
SL.SLEEVE
S.C.SOLID CORE
S.P.SOUND PROOF(ING)
S.T.C.SOUND TRANSMISSION
COEFFICIENT
S SOUTH
SPCR.SPACER
SPKR.SPEAKER
SPEC.SPECIFICATION(S)
SQ.SQUARE
S.STL.STAINLESS STEEL
STD.STANDARD
STA.STATION
STL.STEEL
STOR.STORAGE
S.D.STORM DRAIN
STRUCT.STRUCTURE/STRUCTURAL
S.C.T.STRUCTURAL CLAY TILE
SUSP.SUSPENDED
SYM.SYMMETRICAL
SYN.SYNTHETIC
SYS.SYSTEM
TK.BD.TACK BOARD
TK.STR.TACK STRIP
TEL.TELEPHONE
T.V.TELEVISION
T.C.TERRA COTTA
TZ.TERRAZZO
THK.THICK(NESS)
THR.THRESHOLD
T.PTN.TOILET PARTITION
T.P.DISP.TOILET PAPER DISPENSER
TOL.TOLERANCE
T&G TONGUE AND GROOVE
T.B.B TOWEL BAR
T.O.C.TOP OF COLUMN
T.O.CONC TOP OF CONCRETE
T.O.F.TOP OF FOOTING
T.O.J.TOP OF JOIST
TRANS.TRANSOM
T TREAD
TYP.TYPICAL
U.B.C.UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
U.C.UNDERCUT
UNFIN.UNFINISHED
UR.URINAL
V.JT.V-JOINT
V.B.VAPOR BARRIER
VAR.VARIES
VNR.VENEER
VERM.VERMICULITE
VERT.VERTICAL
V.G.VERTICAL GRAIN
VIN.VINYL
VIN.B.VINYL BASE
VIN.F.VINYL FABRIC
VIN.T.VINYL TILE
WSCT.WAINSCOT
W.T.W.WALL TO WALL
W.H.WALL HUNG
W.C.WATER CLOSET
W.PRFG WATERPROOFING
W.REP.WATER REPELLENT
W.S.WATERSTOP
W.W.F.WELDED WIRE FABRIC
W WEST
W.WIDTH/WIDE
WDW.WINDOW
W.GLS.WIRE GLASS
W.M.WIRE MESH
W/O WITHOUT
WD.WOOD
WD.B.WOOD BASE
W.PT.WORKING POINT
MASONRY:
STONE VENEER
CERAMIC TILE
CONCRETE:
CONCRETE BLOCK
CAST-IN-PLACE
AND PRECAST
EARTHWORK:
EARTH/SOIL
STONE/GRAVEL FILL
INSULATION:
BATT/BLANKET
RIGID
SPRAY
FINISH MATERIALS:
ACOUSTIC TILE
GLASS
CAULK AND SEALANTS:
SEALANT W/BACKER ROD
JOINT FILLER
WOOD:
FINISH
ROUGH FRAMING
CONTINUOUS
BLOCKING
DISCONTINUOUS
PLYWOOD
PLASTER/BACKING:
CEMENT GROUT
W/METAL LATH
GYPSUM WALL BOARD
GLASS MESH
MORTAR BOARD
FLOOR COVERING:
RESILIENT TILE FLOORING
CARPET
WOOD FLOORING
SETTING BEDS:
SAND/MORTAR
METAL:
ALUMINUM
STEEL
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAME
GENERAL NOTES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SYMBOLS PROJECT DIRECTORY
ABBREVIATIONS
ARCHITECTURAL SYMBOLS
BUILDING LOCATION MAP
INDEX
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONG1.1
INSIDE COVER
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
● = DRAWING INCLUDED
○ = DRAWING NOT INCLUDED
SHEET
NUMBER SHEET NAME 01/07/2019 RDS01-GENERAL
G1.0 COVER ●
G1.1 INSIDE COVER ●
G1.2 SURVEY ●
Z0.0 RDS MASSING DIAGRAMS ●
Z0.1 LOT AREA / FAR / ZONING ●
Z0.2A RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS - UNIT A ●
Z0.2B RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS - UNIT B ●
Z0.4A FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS - UNIT A ●
Z0.4B FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS - UNIT B ●
Z0.5A FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS - UNIT A ●
Z0.5B FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS - UNIT B ●
Z0.6B FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS - UNIT B ●
05-ARCHITECTURAL
A1.0 SITE PLAN ●
A2.0A LOWER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT B ●
A2.0B LOWER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT B ●
A2.1A MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT A ●
A2.1B MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT B ●
A2.2A UPPER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT A ●
A2.2B UPPER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT B ●
A2.3A ROOF PLAN - UNIT A ●
A2.3B ROOF PLAN - UNIT B ●
A3.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - UNIT A ●
A3.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - UNIT A ●
A3.3 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - UNIT B ●
A3.4 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - UNIT B ●
A9.0A PERSPECTIVES - UNIT A ●
A9.0B PERSPECTIVES - UNIT B ●P51VI.A.
5009
5010
5026 5027
5049
5050
6004
6005
6006
6014
6015
6016
6017
6018
6019
6020
6021
6022
6023
6024
6025
6026
6033
6034
6036
6038
6041
6042
7008
7009
7010
20' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT
PLAT BOOK 122 PAGE 22
& AGREEMENT REC. NO. 647627
10' POWER LINE EASEMENT
BOOK 530 PAGE 678
CENTERED OVER FIELD LOCATED ELECTRIC LINE
(SEE NOTE NO. 9)
FOUND NO. 4 REBAR, NO CAP
CURRENT CENTERLINE
SI JOHNSON DITCH
6,621 SQ.FT.+/-
0.152 AC.+/-
6,619 SQ.FT.+/-
0.152 AC.+/-
7,490 SQ.FT.+/-8TH STREET 75.37' RIGHT-OF-WAY(ASPHALT SURFACE)U.S.F.S PROPERTY
U.S.F.S PROPERTY
10' WITNESS CORNER
10' WITNESS CORNER
10' WITNESS CORNER240.81'^ϭϰΣϱϬΖϭϱΗtEϭϰΣϱϬΖϭϱΗ 110.37'EϭϰΣϱϬΖϭϱΗ 110.34'70.20'GAS LINE EASEMENT
(SEE NOTE NO. 7)
SEWER MANHOLE
RIM ELV=7899.36'
INV OUT (NORTH) 7891.40'
INV IN (SOUTH)ELV=7892.05'
INV IN (SOUTHWEST)ELV=7891.44'
LOT 4
11,655 SQ.FT.+/-
0.267 AC.+/-
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 5
9.75' WITNESS CORNER
EϭϰΣϱϬΖϮϰΗ ϳϬ͘ϯϭΖ^ϳϰΣϬ
ϭ
Ζ
Ϭ
Ϯ
Η
ϭ
ϰ
ϯ
͘
ϳ
ϵ
Ζ
^ϳϱΣϭ
Ϭ
Ζ
ϭ
ϳ
Η
ϭ
ϴ
Ϭ
͘
ϯ
Ϯ
Ζ
^ϰϭΣϮϮΖϰϭΗtϴϭ͘ϴϰΖEϭϰΣϱϬΖϮϰΗ ϱϵ͘ϵϵΖ60.09'
59.61'
60.62'EϭϰΣϱϮΖϬϭΗ ϭϭϬ͘ϮϮΖEϭϱΣϬϴΖϰϴΗ ϭϭϬ͘ϭϯΖEϭϰΣϰϵΖϮϵΗ ϭϭϬ͘ϬϰΖXGA
S
XGAS
XGAS
XGAS
XGAS
XGAS
VIEW LINES
10' SOURCE GAS
RIGHT-OF-WAY
REC. NO. 609964
20' FORMER ALLEY VACATED BY
UNRECORDED CITY OF ASPEN
RESOLUTION DATED MARCH 3, 1937
AND DOCUMENT BOOK 167 PAGE 305
7.5' WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT
PLAT BOOK 122 PAGE 22
UTILITY EASEMENT
PLAT BOOK 122 PAGE 22
20' DITCH EASEMENT
SI JOHNSON
REC. NO. 647624
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
PARCEL A:
LOT 4 AS DESCRIBED ON THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER STATION
SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT PAGE 022 AS RECEPTION
NO. 647625.
PARCEL B: (EASEMENT INTEREST)
E ^^ ^ D EddKWZ >;>KdϰͿKZ/E'dKd, ͞ ^^Ehd/>/dz
^ D Ed͟Z d zd, D E EZ ^dd W>dK&ZE' Z^dd/KE
SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT PAGE 22 AS RECEPTION
NO. 647625 AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 1(A) OF THE SHARED ACCESS WAY AND
DRAINAGE SYSTEM USE, MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENTS AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY
25, 2018 AS RECEPTION
NO. 647627.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF:
SHEET 1 OF 1
LOT 4, RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 12
TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.
WITHIN PORTIONS OF BLOCK 9 OF THE ASPEN TOWNSITE, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
NOTES
1.DATE OF FIELDWORK: SEPTEMBER 25 - 26, AND OCTOBER 7, 10 AND 11, 2013. UPDATED JANUARY 26,
2015 AND MARCH 27, 2018.
2.DATE OF PREPARATION: SEPTEMBER - OCTOBER, 2013. UPDATED JANUARY, 2015; APRIL AND JULY,
2018.
3.^/^K& Z/E'͗ Z/E'K&^ϳϱΣϬϱΖϮϰΗ dt Ed, EKZd,t ^dKZE ZK&ZE' Z
STATION SUBDIVISION, MONUMENTED BY A 3/4" STEEL PIPE WITH AN UNMARKED CAP, AND THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 9, MONUMENTED BY A 3/4" STEEL PIPE WITH AN UNMARKED CAP.
4.BASIS OF SURVEY: THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PREPARED BY G.E. BUCHANAN, DATED
DECEMBER 15, 1959; CITY OF ASPEN GPS CONTROL MONUMENTATION MAP PREPARED BY MARCIN
ENGINEERING LLC, DATED DECEMBER 2, 2009; THE PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED
MAY 22, 2013 AS RECEPTION NO. 599691; THE LAND SURVEY PLAT RECORDED JUNE 6, 2011 AS
RECEPTION NO. 580311; THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION
RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625 (PLAT BOOK 122 PAGE 22); VARIOUS DOCUMENTS
OF RECORD, AND THE FOUND MONUMENTS, AS SHOWN.
5.THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC (SE) TO DETERMINE
OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. FOR ALL INFORMATION REGARDING EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF
WAY AND/OR TITLE OF RECORD, SE RELIED UPON THE ABOVE SAID PLATS DESCRIBED IN NOTE 4 AND
THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, NO. 187690 WITH A
DATE OF JULY 25, 2018.
6.PER ORDINANCE NO. 23 (2016) THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED AS MEDIUM DENSITY R-6:
6.1.MINIMUM FRONT YARD (FEET): PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS: 10. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: 15.
6.2.MINIMUM REAR YARD (FEET): PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS: 10. FOR THE PORTION OF A PRINCIPAL
BUILDING USED SOLELY AS A GARAGE: 5. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: 5.
6.3.MINIMUM SIDE YARD:
MINIMUM SIZE FOR EACH SIDE YARD: 15 FEET
TOTAL OF BOTH SIDE YARDS: 35 FEET, PLUS 1 FOOT FOR EACH ADDITIONAL 400 SQUARE FEET
OF GROSS LOT AREA, TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 FEET OF TOTAL SIDE YARD
7.ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT (F.S.M. 2714) IS A
RIGHT-OF-WAY TO K.N. ENERGY FOR A NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION PIPELINE. SAID DOCUMENT
REFERENCES A 5 FOOT AND 10 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE SAME PIPELINE.
8.BASIS OF ELEVATION: THE 2009 CITY OF ASPEN MARCIN CONTROL DATUM, WHICH IS BASED ON AN
ELEVATION OF 7720.88' (NAVD 1988) ON THE NGS STATION "S-159". THIS ESTABLISHED A SITE
BENCHMARK, AS SHOWN HEREON. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS TWO 2' FEET.
9.THE EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED MARCH 4, 1987 AS RECEPTION NO. 286550 (BOOK 530 AT
PAGE 678) DESCRIBES A 10 FOOT WIDE UNDERGROUND POWER LINE EASEMENT WHICH AFFECTS THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS SHOWN HEREON. IN ADDITION, IN SECTION 1 OF SAID AGREEMENT, A 6
FOOT WIDE NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR AN ABOVE GROUND TRANSFORMER IS GRANTED TO THE
CITY OF ASPEN. NO TRANSFORMERS WERE FOUND WITHIN THE EASEMENT.
10.THE APPROXIMATE AREA OF THE PORTION OF LOT 4 WITHIN THE VACATED PORTION OF THE ALLEY IS
1,613 SQ.FT. MORE OR LESS.
11.ACCORDING TO THE FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (08097C0203C, JUNE 4, 1987) THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN A FLOOD ZONE.
12.PER THE DOCUMENT RECORDED MAY 20, 1940 AS BOOK 167 AT PAGE 305 AND THE UNRECORDED CITY
OF ASPEN RESOLUTION FROM THE REGULAR SESSION DATED MARCH 3, 1937, FRANCIS STREET
BETWEEN BLOCKS 9 AND 10 AND THE ASSOCIATED ALLEYS HAVE BEEN VACATED.
NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL
ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS
AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION
BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN
YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.
SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(970) 704-0311 SOPRISENG@SOPRISENG.COM GRK 18060 11/20/2018 G:\2018\18060\SURVEY\Survey DWGs\Working Base Map\18060 BASE.dwg
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
SEWER MANHOLE
WATER HYDRANT
WATER VALVE
ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER
TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
CATV PEDESTAL
GENERAL UTILITY NOTE
1. THE LOCATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED
BASED ON UTILITY MAPS, CONSTRUCTION/DESIGN PLANS, OTHER
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY UTILITY COMPANIES AND ACTUAL FIELD
LOCATIONS IN SOME INSTANCES. THESE UTILITIES, AS SHOWN, MAY
NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR FIELD
LOCATION OF UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
EXISTING CONDITIONS LEGEND
WATER MANHOLE
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
GAS LINE
WATER LINE
SEWER LINE
UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
ugug
w w
ssss
ue ue
utut
SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
I, GEOFFREY R. KELLER, HEREBY CERTIFY TO: HAYMAX CAPITAL, LLC; STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY; ASPEN DRAGONFLY PARTNERS III, LLC AND
FOREST LOOKOUT II LLC
d,dd,/^/^EΗ/DWZKs D Ed^hZs zW>dΗ^ &/E z͘Z͘^͘ΑϯϴͲϱϭͲϭϬϮ;ϵͿEd,d/d/^DKEhD Ed >E^hZs z^,Kt/E'd,
LOCATION OF ALL SETBACKS, STRUCTURES, VISIBLE UTILITIES, FENCES, OR WALLS SITUATED ON THE DESCRIBED PARCEL AND WITHIN FIVE FEET OF ALL
BOUNDARIES OF SUCH PARCEL, ANY CONFLICTING BOUNDARY EVIDENCE OR VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, UTILITIES MARKED BY CLIENT AND ALL DEPICTABLE
EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY'S, COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE NO. 187690, OR OTHER SOURCES AS SPECIFIED
ON THE IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT.
THE ERROR OF CLOSURE FOR THIS PLAT IS LESS THAN 1/15,000.
______________________________________
GEOFFREY R. KELLER L.S. #37997
CURB STOP
FOUND NO. 5 REBAR W/ALUMINUM, L.S. 29408
FOUND GOVERNMENT MONUMENT, AS DESCRIBED
FOUND MONUMENT, AS DESCRIBED
SITE
IRRIGATION VALVE
DECIDUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
EDGE OF VEGETATION
1 inch = ft.
( IN FEET )
GRAPHIC SCALE
010 10 20
10
405
EXISTING CONDITIONS LEGEND
ELECTRIC METER
EXISTING GASXGASXGAS
CABLE LINEuc
P52VI.A.
8TH STREETSMUGGLER STREET
ACCESS EASEMENT
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
DWELLING A
DWELLING B
SB15' - 0"SB15' - 0"SB
10' - 0"
10' - 0"EM10'
-
0"8TH STREETSMUGGLER STREET
ACCESS EASEMENT
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
DWELLING A
DWELLING B
SB21' - 6"SB18' - 6"SB
10' - 0"
LOT 5 EM10'
-
0"8TH STREETSMUGGLER STREET
ACCESS EASEMENT
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
DWELLING A
DWELLING B
SB15' - 0"SB15' - 0"SB
10' - 0"10' - 0"EM10'
-
0"
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.0
RDS MASSING
DIAGRAMS
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/32" = 1'-0"
DIAGRAM - DETACHED1
1/32" = 1'-0"
DIAGRAM - DUPLEX21/32" = 1'-0"
DIAGRAM - DETACHED ADDRESSING 8TH
STREET3P53
VI.A.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
ZONING ALLOWANCE & PROJECT SUMMARY
DETACHED DWELLINGS
PARCEL #
ZONE DISTRICT R-6
EXISTING ALLOWED ALLOWED
(PRINCIPAL) (ACCESSORY)SETBACKS
FRONT
REAR
COMBINED FRONT/REAR
SIDE
COMBINED SIDE
DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS
CORNER LOT
HEIGHT LIMIT 25'
SUPPLEMENTAL BREAKDOWN INFO EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
OPEN SPACE %
SITE COVERAGE
ON-SITE PARKING
NET LEASABLE/COMM SF N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/AN/A
31% MAX N/A
4 6
LAND VALUE SUMMARY ACTUAL VALUE
LAND
IMPROVEMENTS
TOTAL
10'
10'
N/A
15' MIN.
39.1375'
10' MIN.
NO
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
273512428004
ZONE DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS
NET LOT AREA
R-6
LOT SIZE PER SURVEY (GROSS AREA)
BASED ON SURVEY FROM SOPRIS ENGINEERING
11,655 SF
REDUCTION FOR EASEMENTS
REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES 0% - 20%
REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES 20% - 30%
REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES 30% - 40%
REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES > 40%
NET LOT AREA 10,042 SF
1,613 SF
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA
PER R6 ZONING, MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA FOR A DETACHED DUPLEX IS BASED
ON THE LOT AREA
LOTS 9,000 - 15,000 SF
ALLOWABLE CALCULATION
UNIQUE APPROVALS
VARIANCES
EXEMPTIONS
TOTAL ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA (NET FAR)
GARAGE EXEMPTION FIRST 250 SF IS EXEMPT
NEXT 251-500 SF EXCLUDE 50% OF AREA
4,392.52 SF (4,080 SF + 62.52 SF + 250 SF)
REFERENCE
26.710.040
REFERENCE
DECK EXEMPTION (ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA = 4,152.52 SF X 15%
622.88 SF EXEMPT
REFERENCE
26.575020.D.7.Z-012
26.575020.D.7.Z-013
N/A
1 TDR (+250 SF)
10,042 SF - 9,000 SF = 1,042 SF / 100 SF = 10.42 * 6 = 62.52 SF, 4080 SF + 62.52 SF + 250 SF (TDR) = 4,392.52 SF
4,080 SF OF FLOOR AREA, PLUS 6 SUARE FEET FOR ECACH ADDITIONAL 100 SQUARE FEET IN NET LOT AREA (MAX 4,440)
N/A
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.1
LOT AREA / FAR /
ZONING
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSIONP54VI.A.
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS COMPLIANCE -UNIT A
RDS SECTION
1. ARTICULATION OF
BUILDING MASS
2. BUILDING
ORIENTATION
(1) STRONG ORIENTATION
(2) MODERATE ORIENTATION
d) OPTIONS
d) OPTIONS
CODE DESCRIPTION PROJECT RESPONSE REFERENCE
THE FRONT FACADE OF A BUILDING SHALL BE PARALLEL TO THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, BOTH STREET FACING FACADES OF A
BUILDING SHALL BE PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER
THE FRONT FACADE OF A BUILDING SHALL FACE THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, ONE STREET FACING FACADE SHALL FACE EACH
INTERSECTING STREET.
(1) MAXIMUM SIDEWALL DEPTH
(2) OFF-SET WITH ONE-STORY
GROUND LEVEL CONNECTOR
(3) INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AT
REAR AND STEP DOWN
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN FIFTY FEET IN DEPTH, AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT
FACADE TO THE REAR WALL. AN ACCESSORY BUILDING THAT IS COMPLETELY SEPARATED FROM THE MAIN BUILDING IS PERMITEED.
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE A PORTION OF ITS MASS AS A SUBORDINATE ONE-STORY, GROUND FLOOR CONNECTING
ELEMENT. THE CONNECTING ELEMENT SHALL BE AT LEAST TEN FEET IN LENGTH AND SHALL BE SETBACK AT LEAST AN ADDITIONAL FIVE
FEET FROM THE SIDEWALL ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING. THE CONNECTING ELEMENT SHALL OCCUR AT A MAXIMUM OF FORTY FIVE
FEET IN DEPTH AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE TO THE REAR WALL. ACCESSIBLE OUTDOOR
SPACE OVER THE CONNECTING ELEMENT IS PERMITTED BUT MAY NOT BE COVERED OR ENCLOSED. ANY RAILING FOR AN ACCESSIBLE
OUTDOOR SPACE OVER A CONNECTING ELEMENT MUST BE THE MINIMUM REASONABLY NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SAFETY
AND BUILDING CODE COMPLIANCE AND THE RAILING MUST BE 50% OR MORE TRANSPARENT.
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. IF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING IS TWO
STORIES, IT SHALL STEP DOWN TO ONE STORY IN THE REAR. THE INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AND ONE STORY STEP DOWN SHALL
OCCUR AT A MAXIMUM OF FORTY-FIVE FEET, AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL TOWARD THE REAR WALL. THE INCREASED
SIDE SETBACKS SHALL BE AT LEAST FIVE FEET GREATER THAN THE SIDE SETBACKS AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
4. ONE-STORY ELEMENT d) OPTIONS
(1) PROJECTING ONE-STORY
ELEMENT
(2) LOGGIA
THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE A ONE-STORY STREET-FACING ELEMENT THAT PROJECTS AT LEAST SIX
FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE AND HAS A WIDTH EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWENTY PERENT OF THE BUILDING'S OVERALL WIDTH.
THIS ONE STORY ELEMENT MAY BE ENCLOSED LIVING SPACE OR A FRONT PORCH THAT IS OPEN ON THREE SIDES .THIS ONE STORY
ELEMENT SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 50 SF IN AREA. ACCESSIBLE SPACE SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED OVER THE FIRST STORY ELEMENT;
HOWEVER, ACCESSIBLE SPACE OVER THE REMAINING FIRST STORY ELEMENTS ON THE FRONT FACADE SHALL NOT BE PRECLUDED.
THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE AN OPEN LOGGIA THAT IS RECESSED AT LEAST SIX FEET BUT NO MORE
THAN TEN FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE, AND HAS A WIDTH EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWENTY PERCENT OF THE BUILDING'S
OVERALL WIDTH. THE LOGGIA SHALL BE OPEN ON AT LEAST TWO SIDES AND FACE THE STREET. THIS ONE STORY ELEMENT SHALL BE A
MINIMUM OF 50 SQUARE FEET IN AREA.
3. BUILD-TO
REQUIREMENT
c) STANDARD AT LEAST SIXTY PERCENT OF THE FRONT FACADE OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL BE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD
SETBACK LINE.
5. GARAGE ACCESS A LOT THAT HAS ACESS FROM AN ALLEY OR PRIVATE STREET SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ACCESS PARKING, GARAGES, AND CARPORTS
FROM THE ALLEY OR PRIVATE STREET. WHERE ALLEY ACCESS IS AVAILABLE, NO PARKING OR VEHICULAR ACESS IS AVAILABLE, NO
PARKING OR VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL BE ALLOWED FORWARD OF THE FRONT FACADE.
a. APPLICABILITY THE ACCESS PARKING AND GARAGE IS ACCESSED FROM THE R.O.W. EASEMENT
6. GARAGE PLACEMENT a. APPLICABILITY
(1) SET BACK GARAGE
(2) SIDE-LOADED GARAGE FORWARD
OF STREET-FACING FACADE
THE FRONT-MOST ELEMENT OF THE GARAGE OR CARPORT SHALL BE SET BACK AT LEAST TEN FEET FURTHER FROM THE STREET THAN
THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF ANY STREET-FACING FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING.
A GARAGE OR CARPORT LOCATED FORWARD OF A STREET-FACING FACADE SHALL BE SIDE-LOADED. THE GARAGE OR CARPORT ENTRY
SHALL BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET. FOR LOTS ON CURVED STREETS, THE GARAGE DOOR SHALL NOT BE PLACE ON ANY
STREET-FACING FACADE OF THE GARAGE.
8. GARAGE DESIGN A GARAGE DOOR THAT IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ALLEY SHALL UTILIZE AN ARTICULATION TECHNIQUE TO BREAK UP ITS FACADEd) OPTIONS
(1) TWO SEPARATE DOORS
(2) APPEARANCE OF TWO
SEPARATE DOORS
A TWO-CAR GARAGE DOOR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS TWO SEPARATE DOORS
A TWO-CAR GARAGE DOOR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH ONE DOOR THAT IS DESIGNED TO APPEAR AS TWO SEPARATE DOORS BY
INCORPORATING A VERTICAL SEPARATING ELEMENT THAT IS AT LEAST ONE FOOT IN WIDTH.
7. GARAGE DIMENSIONS THE WIDTH OF THE LIVING AREA ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF A STREET-FACING FACADE ON WHICH A GARAGE IS LOCATED SHALL BE AT
LEAST FIVE FEET GREATER THAN THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE OR CARPORT
a. APPLICABILITY
9. ENTRY CONNECTION
THE FRONT FACADE SHALL BE ORIENTED TO FACE THE STREET ON WHICH IT IS LOCATED
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL INCORPORATE A ONE-STORY ELEMENT ON THE FRONT FACADE. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-SIDE
CONFIGURATION ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A ONE-STORY ELEMENT PER DWELLING UNIT.
A GARAGE OR CARPORT SHALL BE PLACED IN A WAY THAT REDUCES ITS PROMINENCE AS VIEWED FROM THE STREET. ON A CORNER
LOT, THIS STANDARD SHALL APPLY TO BOTH STREET-FACING FACADES.
d) OPTIONS A BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE A VISUAL AND /OR PHYSICAL CONNECTION BETWEEN A PRIMARY ENTRY AND THE STREET. ON A CORNER
LOT, AN ENTRY CONNECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO AT LEAST ONE OF THE TWO INTERSECTING STREETS. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-
SIDE CONFIGURATION SHALL HAVE ONE ENTRY CONNECTION PER DWELLING UNIT.
(1) STREET ORIENTED ENTRANCE
(2) OPEN FRONT PORCH
AT LEAST ONE ENTRY DOOR SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. THE ENTRY DOOR SHALL FACE
THE STREET AND SHALL NOT BE SET BACK MORE THAN 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE OF THE
PRINCIPAL BUILDING. FENCING, HEDGEROWS, WALLS OR OTHER PERMITTED STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY TO THE
DOOR.
THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE A FRONT PORCH THAT IS OPEN ON AT LEAST TWO SIDES, A MINIMUM OF
50 SF, FACE THE STREET, AND HAVE A DEMARCATED PATHWAY THAT CONNECTS THE STREET TO THE FRONT PORCH. THE FRONT
PORCH SHALL CONTAIN THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING. FENDING, HEDGEROWS, WALL OR OTHER PERMITTED
STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY TO THE PORCH OR THE DEMARCATED PATHWAY.
10. DOOR HEIGHT c) STANDARD ALL DOORS FACING A STREET SHALL NOT BE TALLER THAN EIGHT FEET. A SMALL TRANSOM WINDOW ABOVE A DOOR SHALL NOT BE
CONSIDERED A PART OF THE DOOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS STANDARD.
11. PORCH HEIGHT c) STANDARD AN ENTRY PORCH OR CANOPY ON THE FRONT FACADE OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL NOT BE MORE THAN ONE-STORY IN HEIGHT AS
DEFINED BY THIS CHAPTER.
12. PRINCIPAL WINDOW d) OPTIONS
(1) STREET-FACING PRINCIPAL
WINDOW
(2) WINDOW GROUP
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE STREET-FACING PRINCIPAL WINDOW OR GROUPING OF SMALLER WINDOWS ACTING
AS A PRINCIPAL WINDOW ON THE FRONT FACADE. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-SIDE CONFIGURATION SHALL HAVE ONE PRINCIPAL WINDOW
PER DWELLING UNIT.
THE FRONT FACADE SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE WINDOW WITH DIMENSIONS OF FOUR FEET BY FOUR FEET OR GREATER
THE FRONT FACADE SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE GROUP OF WINDOWS THAT WHEN MEASURED AS A GROUP HAS DIMENSIONS OF FOUR
FEET BY FOUR FEET OR GREATER.
13. WINDOW PLACEMENT c) STANDARD A STREET FACING WINDOW ON A BUILDING SHALL NOT VERTICALLY SPAN MORE THAN ONE STORY AS DEFINED BY THIS CHAPTER.
14. NON-ORTHOGONAL
WINDOW LIMIT
c) STANDARD A BUILDING SHALL HAVE NO MORE THAN ONE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW ON EACH FACADE OF THE BUILDING THAT FACES THE
STREET. A SINGLE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW IN A GABLE END MAY BE DIVIDED WITH MULLIONS AND STILL BE CONSIDERED ONE NON-
ORTHOGONAL WINDOW.
15. LIGHT WELL/STAIRWELL
LOCATION
c) STANDARD A LIGHT WELL, AREAWAY, SKYLIGHT, OR STAIRWELL SHALL NOT BE LOCATED BETWEEN THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF A STREET-FACING
FACADE AND ANY STREET.
16. MATERIALS c) STANDARD THE QUALITY OF THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND THEIR APPLICATION SHALL BE CONSISTENT ON ALL SIDES OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY OR
DUPLEX BUILDING.
THE FRONT FACADE IS ORIENTED TOWARDS 8TH STREET A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1A PLAN
THE BUILDING IS NOT MORE THAN 50' IN LENGTH A1.1 SITE PLAN
A2.1A PLAN
AT LEAST 60% OF THE FRONT FACADE IS WITHIN 5' OF THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK A1.0 SITE PLAN
THE LOGGIA IS RECESSED A MINIMUM 6 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE. THE WIDTH IS ALSO MORE THAN 20% OF
THE BUILDINGS OVERALL WIDTH. THE AREA OF THE LOGGIA IS 51 SF. THE LOGGIA IS OPEN ON 2 SIDES AND FACES
THE STREET
A2.1A PLAN
A3.1 ELEVATIONS
Z0.5A FLOOR AREA
THE GARAGE IS ACCESSED FROM THE R.O.W. EASEMENT
THE GARAGE DOES NOT FACE THE STREET
THE GARAGE IS ONE DOOR BUT APPEARS AS TWO WITH VERTICAL SEPARATING ELEMENT THAT IS AT LEAST ONE
FOOT
A3.2 ELEVATIONS
THE FRONT DOOR FACES THE STREET AND IS HAS A 6' OVERHANG ABOVE. FENCING, HEDGEROWS, WALLS, AND
OTHER STRUCTURES DO NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY OF THE FRONT DOOR
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1A PLAN
A3.1A ELEVATIONS
THE FRONT DOOR OPENING IS 8'-0"
THE LOGGIA CANOPY IS < 10' IN HEIGHT
A3.1 ELEVATIONS
A3.1 ELEVATIONS
THE GABLE END ON THE FRONT FACADE HAS A WINDOW THAT IS GREATER THAN 4' X 4'
THERE IS A CLEAR BREAK BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND STORY. NO WINDOWS SPAN BETWEEN VISUALLY A3.1 ELEVATIONS
A3.1 ELEVATIONS
THE STREET FACING FACADE ONLY HAS ONE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW, WHICH IS A MULLION DIVIDED WINDOW IN
THE GABLE END
A3.1 ELEVATIONS
NO LIGHT WELLS, STAIRWELL OR SKYLIGHTS ARE LOCATED BETWEEN THE FRONT-MOST WALL AND 8TH STREET A2.1 PLAN
THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE CONSISTENT ON ALL ELEVATIONS. MASONRY IS PROPOSED AT THE BASE WITH
WOOD ON THE UPPER LEVEL
A3.1 ELEVATIONS
A3.2 ELEVATIONS
A3.3 ELEVATIONS
A3.4 ELEVATIONS
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1A PLAN
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1A PLAN
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1A PLAN
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.2A
RESIDENTIAL
DESIGN STANDARDS
- UNIT A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSIONP55
VI.A.
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS COMPLIANCE -UNIT B (ACCESS EASEMENT IS CONSIDERED THE "STREET" FOR THIS UNIT)
RDS SECTION
1. ARTICULATION OF
BUILDING MASS
2. BUILDING
ORIENTATION
(1) STRONG ORIENTATION
(2) MODERATE ORIENTATION
d) OPTIONS
d) OPTIONS
CODE DESCRIPTION PROJECT RESPONSE REFERENCE
THE FRONT FACADE OF A BUILDING SHALL BE PARALLEL TO THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, BOTH STREET FACING FACADES OF A
BUILDING SHALL BE PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER
THE FRONT FACADE OF A BUILDING SHALL FACE THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, ONE STREET FACING FACADE SHALL FACE EACH
INTERSECTING STREET.
(1) MAXIMUM SIDEWALL DEPTH
(2) OFF-SET WITH ONE-STORY
GROUND LEVEL CONNECTOR
(3) INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AT
REAR AND STEP DOWN
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN FIFTY FEET IN DEPTH, AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT
FACADE TO THE REAR WALL. AN ACCESSORY BUILDING THAT IS COMPLETELY SEPARATED FROM THE MAIN BUILDING IS PERMITEED.
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE A PORTION OF ITS MASS AS A SUBORDINATE ONE-STORY, GROUND FLOOR CONNECTING
ELEMENT. THE CONNECTING ELEMENT SHALL BE AT LEAST TEN FEET IN LENGTH AND SHALL BE SETBACK AT LEAST AN ADDITIONAL FIVE
FEET FROM THE SIDEWALL ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING. THE CONNECTING ELEMENT SHALL OCCUR AT A MAXIMUM OF FORTY FIVE
FEET IN DEPTH AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE TO THE REAR WALL. ACCESSIBLE OUTDOOR
SPACE OVER THE CONNECTING ELEMENT IS PERMITTED BUT MAY NOT BE COVERED OR ENCLOSED. ANY RAILING FOR AN ACCESSIBLE
OUTDOOR SPACE OVER A CONNECTING ELEMENT MUST BE THE MINIMUM REASONABLY NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SAFETY
AND BUILDING CODE COMPLIANCE AND THE RAILING MUST BE 50% OR MORE TRANSPARENT.
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. IF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING IS TWO
STORIES, IT SHALL STEP DOWN TO ONE STORY IN THE REAR. THE INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AND ONE STORY STEP DOWN SHALL
OCCUR AT A MAXIMUM OF FORTY-FIVE FEET, AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL TOWARD THE REAR WALL. THE INCREASED
SIDE SETBACKS SHALL BE AT LEAST FIVE FEET GREATER THAN THE SIDE SETBACKS AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
4. ONE-STORY ELEMENT d) OPTIONS
(1) PROJECTING ONE-STORY
ELEMENT
(2) LOGGIA
THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE A ONE-STORY STREET-FACING ELEMENT THAT PROJECTS AT LEAST SIX
FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE AND HAS A WIDTH EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWENTY PERENT OF THE BUILDING'S OVERALL WIDTH.
THIS ONE STORY ELEMENT MAY BE ENCLOSED LIVING SPACE OR A FRONT PORCH THAT IS OPEN ON THREE SIDES .THIS ONE STORY
ELEMENT SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 50 SF IN AREA. ACCESSIBLE SPACE SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED OVER THE FIRST STORY ELEMENT;
HOWEVER, ACCESSIBLE SPACE OVER THE REMAINING FIRST STORY ELEMENTS ON THE FRONT FACADE SHALL NOT BE PRECLUDED.
THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE AN OPEN LOGGIA THAT IS RECESSED AT LEAST SIX FEET BUT NO MORE
THAN TEN FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE, AND HAS A WIDTH EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWENTY PERCENT OF THE BUILDING'S
OVERALL WIDTH. THE LOGGIA SHALL BE OPEN ON AT LEAST TWO SIDES AND FACE THE STREET. THIS ONE STORY ELEMENT SHALL BE A
MINIMUM OF 50 SQUARE FEET IN AREA.
3. BUILD-TO
REQUIREMENT
c) STANDARD AT LEAST SIXTY PERCENT OF THE FRONT FACADE OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL BE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD
SETBACK LINE.
5. GARAGE ACCESS A LOT THAT HAS ACESS FROM AN ALLEY OR PRIVATE STREET SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ACCESS PARKING, GARAGES, AND CARPORTS
FROM THE ALLEY OR PRIVATE STREET. WHERE ALLEY ACCESS IS AVAILABLE, NO PARKING OR VEHICULAR ACESS IS AVAILABLE, NO
PARKING OR VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL BE ALLOWED FORWARD OF THE FRONT FACADE.
a. APPLICABILITY THE ACCESS PARKING AND GARAGE IS ACCESSED FROM THE ACCESS EASEMENT
6. GARAGE PLACEMENT a. APPLICABILITY
(1) SET BACK GARAGE
(2) SIDE-LOADED GARAGE FORWARD
OF STREET-FACING FACADE
THE FRONT-MOST ELEMENT OF THE GARAGE OR CARPORT SHALL BE SET BACK AT LEAST TEN FEET FURTHER FROM THE STREET THAN
THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF ANY STREET-FACING FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING.
A GARAGE OR CARPORT LOCATED FORWARD OF A STREET-FACING FACADE SHALL BE SIDE-LOADED. THE GARAGE OR CARPORT ENTRY
SHALL BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET. FOR LOTS ON CURVED STREETS, THE GARAGE DOOR SHALL NOT BE PLACE ON ANY
STREET-FACING FACADE OF THE GARAGE.
8. GARAGE DESIGN A GARAGE DOOR THAT IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ALLEY SHALL UTILIZE AN ARTICULATION TECHNIQUE TO BREAK UP ITS FACADEd) OPTIONS
(1) TWO SEPARATE DOORS
(2) APPEARANCE OF TWO
SEPARATE DOORS
A TWO-CAR GARAGE DOOR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS TWO SEPARATE DOORS
A TWO-CAR GARAGE DOOR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH ONE DOOR THAT IS DESIGNED TO APPEAR AS TWO SEPARATE DOORS BY
INCORPORATING A VERTICAL SEPARATING ELEMENT THAT IS AT LEAST ONE FOOT IN WIDTH.
7. GARAGE DIMENSIONS THE WIDTH OF THE LIVING AREA ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF A STREET-FACING FACADE ON WHICH A GARAGE IS LOCATED SHALL BE AT
LEAST FIVE FEET GREATER THAN THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE OR CARPORT
a. APPLICABILITY
9. ENTRY CONNECTION
THE FRONT FACADE SHALL BE ORIENTED TO FACE THE STREET ON WHICH IT IS LOCATED
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL INCORPORATE A ONE-STORY ELEMENT ON THE FRONT FACADE. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-SIDE
CONFIGURATION ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A ONE-STORY ELEMENT PER DWELLING UNIT.
A GARAGE OR CARPORT SHALL BE PLACED IN A WAY THAT REDUCES ITS PROMINENCE AS VIEWED FROM THE STREET. ON A CORNER
LOT, THIS STANDARD SHALL APPLY TO BOTH STREET-FACING FACADES.
d) OPTIONS A BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE A VISUAL AND /OR PHYSICAL CONNECTION BETWEEN A PRIMARY ENTRY AND THE STREET. ON A CORNER
LOT, AN ENTRY CONNECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO AT LEAST ONE OF THE TWO INTERSECTING STREETS. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-
SIDE CONFIGURATION SHALL HAVE ONE ENTRY CONNECTION PER DWELLING UNIT.
(1) STREET ORIENTED ENTRANCE
(2) OPEN FRONT PORCH
AT LEAST ONE ENTRY DOOR SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. THE ENTRY DOOR SHALL FACE
THE STREET AND SHALL NOT BE SET BACK MORE THAN 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE OF THE
PRINCIPAL BUILDING. FENCING, HEDGEROWS, WALLS OR OTHER PERMITTED STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY TO THE
DOOR.
THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE A FRONT PORCH THAT IS OPEN ON AT LEAST TWO SIDES, A MINIMUM OF
50 SF, FACE THE STREET, AND HAVE A DEMARCATED PATHWAY THAT CONNECTS THE STREET TO THE FRONT PORCH. THE FRONT
PORCH SHALL CONTAIN THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING. FENDING, HEDGEROWS, WALL OR OTHER PERMITTED
STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY TO THE PORCH OR THE DEMARCATED PATHWAY.
10. DOOR HEIGHT c) STANDARD ALL DOORS FACING A STREET SHALL NOT BE TALLER THAN EIGHT FEET. A SMALL TRANSOM WINDOW ABOVE A DOOR SHALL NOT BE
CONSIDERED A PART OF THE DOOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS STANDARD.
11. PORCH HEIGHT c) STANDARD AN ENTRY PORCH OR CANOPY ON THE FRONT FACADE OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL NOT BE MORE THAN ONE-STORY IN HEIGHT AS
DEFINED BY THIS CHAPTER.
12. PRINCIPAL WINDOW d) OPTIONS
(1) STREET-FACING PRINCIPAL
WINDOW
(2) WINDOW GROUP
A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE STREET-FACING PRINCIPAL WINDOW OR GROUPING OF SMALLER WINDOWS ACTING
AS A PRINCIPAL WINDOW ON THE FRONT FACADE. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-SIDE CONFIGURATION SHALL HAVE ONE PRINCIPAL WINDOW
PER DWELLING UNIT.
THE FRONT FACADE SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE WINDOW WITH DIMENSIONS OF FOUR FEET BY FOUR FEET OR GREATER
THE FRONT FACADE SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE GROUP OF WINDOWS THAT WHEN MEASURED AS A GROUP HAS DIMENSIONS OF FOUR
FEET BY FOUR FEET OR GREATER.
13. WINDOW PLACEMENT c) STANDARD A STREET FACING WINDOW ON A BUILDING SHALL NOT VERTICALLY SPAN MORE THAN ONE STORY AS DEFINED BY THIS CHAPTER.
14. NON-ORTHOGONAL
WINDOW LIMIT
c) STANDARD A BUILDING SHALL HAVE NO MORE THAN ONE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW ON EACH FACADE OF THE BUILDING THAT FACES THE
STREET. A SINGLE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW IN A GABLE END MAY BE DIVIDED WITH MULLIONS AND STILL BE CONSIDERED ONE NON-
ORTHOGONAL WINDOW.
15. LIGHT WELL/STAIRWELL
LOCATION
c) STANDARD A LIGHT WELL, AREAWAY, SKYLIGHT, OR STAIRWELL SHALL NOT BE LOCATED BETWEEN THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF A STREET-FACING
FACADE AND ANY STREET.
16. MATERIALS c) STANDARD THE QUALITY OF THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND THEIR APPLICATION SHALL BE CONSISTENT ON ALL SIDES OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY OR
DUPLEX BUILDING.
THE FRONT FACADE IS ORIENTED TOWARDS THE ACCESS EASEMENT A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1B PLAN
THE BUILDING IS NOT MORE THAN 50' IN DEPTH A1.1 SITE PLAN
AT LEAST 60% OF THE FRONT FACADE IS WITHIN 5' OF THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1B PLAN
A3.3 ELEVATION
THE LOGGIA IS RECESSED AT LEAST 6 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE. THE WIDTH IS 20% OF THE BUILDINGS
OVERALL WIDTH. THE AREA OF THE LOGGIA IS 76 SF. THE LOGGIA IS OPEN ON 2 SIDES AND FACES THE STREET
A2.1B PLAN
A3.4 ELEVATIONS
Z0.5B FLOOR AREA
THE GARAGE IS SETBACK MORE THAN 10' FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL
LIVING AREA WIDTH IS AT LEAST 5' GREATER THAN GARAGE WIDTH
THE GARAGE DOOR WILL HAVE A 1' WIDE VERTICAL ELEMENT TO APPEAR AS TWO DOORS A3.4 ELEVATIONS
THE FRONT DOOR FACES THE ACCESS EASEMENT AND IS AT LEAST 6' FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT
FACADE. FENCING, HEDGEROWS, WALLS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES DO NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY OF THE FRONT
DOOR
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1B PLAN
THE FRONT DOOR OPENING IS 8'-0"
THE LOGGIA CANOPY IS < 10' IN HEIGHT
A3.4 ELEVATIONS
A3.4 ELEVATIONS
THE FRONT FACADE HAS A WINDOW THAT IS GREATER THAN 4' X 4'
THERE IS A CLEAR BREAK BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND STORY. NO WINDOWS SPAN BETWEEN VISUALLY A3.4 ELEVATIONS
A3.4 ELEVATIONS
THE ACCESS EASEMENT FACING FACADE HAS NO NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOWS A3.4 ELEVATIONS
ONE LIGHT WELL IS LOCATED BETWEEN THE FRONT FACADE AND ACCESS EASEMENT, VARIANCE REQUIRED A2.1B PLAN
THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE CONSISTENT ON ALL ELEVATIONS. MASONRY IS PROPOSED AT THE BASE WITH
WOOD ON THE UPPER LEVEL
A3.1 ELEVATIONS
A3.2 ELEVATIONS
A3.3 ELEVATIONS
A3.4 ELEVATIONS
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1A PLAN
A2.1B PLAN
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1B PLAN
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.2B
RESIDENTIAL
DESIGN STANDARDS
- UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSIONP56VI.A.
W
D
1515 SF
UNIT A - LOWER
LEVEL
A
17' - 6"
C
31' - 2 1/2"4' - 8"8"D8' - 9 1/2"E
1' - 3 1/2"F22' - 2 1/2"G
26' - 0 1/2"J
21' - 4 1/2"K27' - 4"H1' - 0 1/2"7' - 7 7/8"8' - 6 3/4"9' - 9 7/8"B5' - 4"LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS)
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -LOWER LEVEL -UNIT A
SUBGRADE LEVEL WALL LABEL TOTAL WALL AREA (SF) EXPOSED WALL AREA (SF)
170.6
304.28
12.59
216.53
253.91
10.61
TOTAL WALL AREA 1581.15 203.12
% OF EXPOSED WALL (EXPOSED/TOTAL)12.85% 203.12 / 1581.15
A
C
E
F
G
H
SUBGRADE AREA CALCULATION (NET)(FAR) 194.7 1515.0 X .1285
52.00B
85.72D
1515.0
118.1
J
K
31.5
53.52
208.41
266.50
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UNIT A
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
194.7
954.0
888.0 977.0
NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF)
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 2036.7 3840.0
1348.0
1515.0
DECK FLOOR AREA (SF) 239.0
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
2036.7
2353.5
UNIT A FLOOR AREA (SF)
UNIT B FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (4,392.52 SF ALLOW.) 4390.2 8579.0
4739.0
3840.0
UNIT A DECK FLOOR AREA
UNIT B DECK FLOOR AREA
TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (658.88 SF ALLOW.)
239.0
367.0
606.0 EXEMPT, UNDER ALLOW.9' - 9"17' - 6"
A 170.6 SF
9' - 9"26' - 0 1/2"
G 253.91 SF
53.52 SF
7' - 7 7/8"8' - 6 3/4"9' - 9 7/8"
B 52 SF
118.1 SF
9' - 9"5' - 4"
31.5 SF
8"4' - 8"9' - 9"31' - 2 1/2"
C 304.28 SF 9' - 9"8' - 9 1/2"
D 85.72 SF 9' - 9"1' - 3 1/2"
E 12.59 SF 9' - 9"22' - 2 1/2"
F 2196.53 SF
9' - 9"1' - 0 1/2"
H 10.61 SF9' - 9"21' - 4 1/2"
J 208.41 SF 9' - 9"27' - 4"
K 266.50 SF
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.4A
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS -
UNIT A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
LOWER LEVEL FAR - UNIT A1P57
VI.A.
2019 SF
UNIT B - LOWER
LEVEL
34' - 4 1/2"6' - 8 3/4"18' - 0 1/4"A
59' - 1 1/2"B28' - 2 1/2"9' - 4"7' - 4"6' - 4 1/2"
C
23' - 0 1/2"D6' - 6"E
36' - 1"F34' - 8 1/2"9' - 9"58' - 11 1/2"
A 574.8 SF 9' - 9"28' - 2 1/2"
B 275 SF
18' - 0 1/4"6' - 8 3/4"34' - 2 1/2"
42 SF
9' - 9"6' - 6"
D 63.4 SF 9' - 9"23' - 0 1/2"
45.8 SF
9' - 4"7' - 4"6' - 4 1/2"9' - 9"36' - 11"
E 360 SF
C 224.6 SF
9' - 9"34' - 8 1/2"
F 338.4 SF
LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS)
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -LOWER LEVEL -UNIT B
SUBGRADE LEVEL WALL LABEL TOTAL WALL AREA (SF) EXPOSED WALL AREA (SF)
574.8
224.6
360
338.4
TOTAL WALL AREA 1836.2 87.8
% OF EXPOSED WALL (EXPOSED/TOTAL)4.78% 87.8 / 1836.2
A
C
E
F
SUBGRADE AREA CALCULATION (NET)(FAR) 96.5 2019.0 X .0478
275B
63.4D
2019.0
42
45.8
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UNIT B
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
96.5
1195.0
1062.0 1150.0
NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF)
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 2353.5 4739.0
1570.0
2019.0
DECK FLOOR AREA (SF) 367.0
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
2036.7
2353.5
UNIT A FLOOR AREA (SF)
UNIT B FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (4,392.52 SF ALLOW.) 4390.2 8579.0
4739.0
3840.0
UNIT A DECK FLOOR AREA
UNIT B DECK FLOOR AREA
TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (658.88 SF ALLOW.)
239.0
367.0
606.0 EXEMPT, UNDER ALLOW.
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.4B
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS -
UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
LOWER LEVEL FAR - UNIT B1P58 VI.A.
UP
DN
515 SF
UNIT A - GARAGE
825 SF
UNIT A - MAIN LEVEL
51 SF
EXEMPT, LOGGIA
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -MAIN LEVEL -UNIT A
515.0
NONE
NONE
NONE
121.0
51.0 (EXEMPT)
GARAGE FLOOR AREA (GROSS)
COUNTABLE GARAGE FLOOR AREA (SF)515 - 375 = 140
FRONT PORCH AREA
OVERHANG OVER 4' (COUNTABLE)
STRUCTURAL STEPS
PATIOS 6" ABOVE GRADE
UNENCLOSED AREAS BENEATH DECKS
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS)833.0
EXEMPT PER 26.575.020.D.5:
STREET FACING PORCHES
SHALL NOT COUNT TOWARD
DECK AREA
EXEMPT PER 26.575.020.D.4.f):
UNENCLOSED AREAS
BENEATH DECKS SHALL BE
EXEMPT FROM DECK AREA
CALCULATIONS
MAIN LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA (SF) 954.0
NONE
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UNIT A
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
194.7
954.0
888.0 977.0
NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF)
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 2036.7 3840.0
1348.0
1515.0
DECK FLOOR AREA (SF) 239.0
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
2036.7
2353.5
UNIT A FLOOR AREA (SF)
UNIT B FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (4,392.52 SF ALLOW.) 4390.2 8579.0
4739.0
3840.0
UNIT A DECK FLOOR AREA
UNIT B DECK FLOOR AREA
TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (658.88 SF ALLOW.)
239.0
367.0
606.0 EXEMPT, UNDER ALLOW.
888 SF
UNIT A - SECOND
LEVEL
239 SF
UNIT A - DECK
18 SF
EXEMPT, TOP OF
ELEVATOR
71 SF
EXEMPT, TOP OF
STAIR
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UPPER LEVEL -UNIT A
71.0
239.0
UPPER LEVEL AREA OF STAIR EXEMPT
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS) 977.0
UPPER LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA (SF) 888.0
89.0
ROOF DECK
TOTAL NET DECK AREA 239.0
977 - 89 = 888
18.0UPPER LEVEL AREA OF ELEVATOR EXEMPT
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.5A
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS -
UNIT A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL FAR - UNIT A11/4" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL FAR - UNIT A2P59
VI.A.
512 SF
UNIT B - GARAGE
1059 SF
UNIT B - MAIN LEVEL
100 SF
EXEMPT, DECK
ABOVE
76 SF
EXEMPT, PORCH
171 SF
EXEMPT, DECK
ABOVE
54 SF
EXEMPT, < 4'
OVERHANG
1' - 11"158 SF
EXEMPT, OVER
DRIVEWAY
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -MAIN LEVEL -UNIT B
512.0
NONE
NONE
NONE
137.0
75.0 (EXEMPT)
GARAGE FLOOR AREA (GROSS)
COUNTABLE GARAGE FLOOR AREA (SF)512 - 375 = 137
FRONT PORCH AREA
OVERHANG OVER 4' (COUNTABLE)
STRUCTURAL STEPS
PATIOS 6" ABOVE GRADE
UNENCLOSED AREAS BENEATH DECKS
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS)1058.0
EXEMPT PER 26.575.020.D.5:
STREET FACING PORCHES
SHALL NOT COUNT TOWARD
DECK AREA
EXEMPT PER 26.575.020.D.4.f):
UNENCLOSED AREAS
BENEATH DECKS SHALL BE
EXEMPT FROM DECK AREA
CALCULATIONS
MAIN LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA (SF) 1195.0
271.0 (EXEMPT)
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UNIT B
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
96.5
1195.0
1062.0 1150.0
NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF)
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 2353.5 4739.0
1570.0
2019.0
DECK FLOOR AREA (SF) 367.0
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
2036.7
2353.5
UNIT A FLOOR AREA (SF)
UNIT B FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (4,392.52 SF ALLOW.) 4390.2 8579.0
4739.0
3840.0
UNIT A DECK FLOOR AREA
UNIT B DECK FLOOR AREA
TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (658.88 SF ALLOW.)
239.0
367.0
606.0 EXEMPT, UNDER ALLOW.
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.5B
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS -
UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL FAR - UNIT B1P60 VI.A.
DN
172 SF
DECK
195 SF
DECK
1063 SF
UNIT B - UPPER
LEVEL
OPEN TO BELOW
87 SF
EXEMPT, TOP OF
STAIR
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UPPER LEVEL -UNIT B
87.0
195.0
UPPER LEVEL AREA OF STAIR EXEMPT
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS) 1150.0
UPPER LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA (SF) 1062.0
ROOF DECK
TOTAL NET DECK AREA 367.0
1150 - 88 = 1062
ROOF DECK 172.0
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UNIT B
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
96.5
1195.0
1062.0 1150.0
NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF)
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 2353.5 4739.0
1570.0
2019.0
DECK FLOOR AREA (SF) 367.0
FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS)
2036.7
2353.5
UNIT A FLOOR AREA (SF)
UNIT B FLOOR AREA (SF)
TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (4,392.52 SF ALLOW.) 4390.2 8579.0
4739.0
3840.0
UNIT A DECK FLOOR AREA
UNIT B DECK FLOOR AREA
TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (658.88 SF ALLOW.)
239.0
367.0
606.0 EXEMPT, UNDER ALLOW.
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.6B
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS -
UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL FAR - UNIT B1P61
VI.A.
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1
B3
B2
BA
A3
A2
A1
AA
AB
AC8TH STREETA3.2
1
A3.2
2
A3.1
1
A3.1 2
A3.4
1
A3.4
2
A3.3
1
A3.3 2
UNIT A
UNIT B
UNIT A DEPTH
49' - 2"
ACCESS EASEMENT
7 9 0 5
7 9 0 4
7 9 0 6
7 9 0 7
7 9 0 8
7 9 0 9
7 9 0 3
7 9 0 2
7 9 0 1
7 9 0 0
FRONT SETBACK
10' - 0"SIDE SETBACK15' - 0"SIDE SETBACK15' - 0"DI
TCH EASEMENT10'
-
0"SIDEWALKUNIT B DEPTH40' - 5 1/2"LOT 5
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.0
SITE PLAN
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/8" = 1'-0"
SITE PLAN1P62 VI.A.
W
D
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1
BA
A3A2A1
AA
AB
AC
BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 4"
GUEST BEDROOM
A006
DEN
A001
PWD
A002
ELEV. MECH
A004 LAUNDRY
A003
ELEV.
A000
MECH
A005
GUEST BEDROOM
A008
BATH
A009
BATH
A007
A002 A000A
A004
A003
A005
A007A
A006 A008
A009A
A007B
A009B
A009C
A3.2
1
A3.22
A3.1
1
A3.1 2
48' - 9"
43' - 4"5' - 5"33' - 4"28' - 0"5' - 4"SETBACK15' - 0"SETBACK
10' - 0"
BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 4"SETBACK15' - 0"DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.0A
LOWER LEVEL
CONSTRUCTION
PLAN - UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
LOWER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT A1P63
VI.A.
UP
BB
BD
BE
B1 B3B2
BA
A3
AA
AB
AC
BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 4"
MECH.
B002
LAUNDRY
B003
OFFICE
B005
GYM/PLAYROOM
B004
BUNKROOM
B006
BATH
B007
GUEST BEDROOM
B008
BATH
B009
DEN
B001
B002
B003
B005
B004 B006
B007A
B007B
B009A
B008
B009C
B009B
60' - 5 1/2"
21' - 10 1/2"38' - 7"37' - 9"6' - 6"17' - 1"12' - 5 1/2"1' - 8 1/2"3' - 0"SETBACK15' - 0"BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 4"
A3.22
A3.4
1
A3.3
1
A3.3 2
DITCH EASEMENT
10' - 0"SETBACK15' - 0"DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.0B
LOWER LEVEL
CONSTRUCTION
PLAN - UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
LOWER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT B1P64 VI.A.
UP
DN
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1
BA
A3A2A1
AA
AB
AC
48' - 9"
43' - 4"5' - 5"33' - 4"28' - 0"5' - 4"ELEV.
A000
ENTRY
A101
MASTER
BEDROOM
A102
MASTER
BATH
A103
MASTER CLOSET
A104
GARAGE
A100
A101B
A000B
A101A
A101C
A102A
A103A
A102B
A103B A103C A103D
A104
A100A
WINDOW WELL
A100B SETBACK15' - 0"SETBACK
10' - 0"
A3.2
1
A3.22
A3.1
1
A3.1 2
A3.3 2
BUILDING LENGTH
49' - 2"
LOGGIA RECESS
6' - 0 1/2"
1' - 5 1/8"
CU CU
CU
CU
CU CU
ELEC.
PANEL
ELEC.
METER
ELEC.
METER
ELEC.
PANEL
GAS
GAS
SETBACK15' - 0"BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 1 1/2"
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.1A
MAIN LEVEL
CONSTRUCTION
PLAN - UNIT A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT A1P65
VI.A.
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1 B3B2
BA
A3
AA
AB
AC
60' - 5 1/2"
21' - 10 1/2"38' - 7"37' - 9"6' - 6"17' - 1"12' - 5 1/2"1' - 8 1/2"GARAGE
B100
MUD
B103
LIVING ROOM
B104
KITCHEN
B105
PWD
B102 ENTRY
B101
B101
B102
B103B
B103A
B105
B104
B100SETBACK15' - 0"A3.22
A3.4
1
A3.42
A3.3
1
A3.3 2
CU CU
CU
CU
CU CU
ELEC.
PANEL
ELEC.
METER
ELEC.
METER
ELEC.
PANEL
GAS
GAS DITCH EASEMENT
10' - 0"SETBACK15' - 0"TRANSFORMER TRANSFORMER
BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 1 1/2"
REFOVEN
DW DWTRASH
BAR / APPLIANCE
LOGGIA RECESS6' - 0"LOGGIA WIDTH
12' - 4 1/2"GARAGE SETBACK FROM FRONT FACADE14' - 4 1/2"OVERALL BUILDING WIDTH
61' - 10 1/2"
LIGHT WELL
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.1B
MAIN LEVEL
CONSTRUCTION
PLAN - UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT B1P66 VI.A.
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1
BA
A3A2A1
AA
AB
AC
LIVING
A201
DINING
A202
KITCHEN
A203
PWD
A204
ELEV.
A000
A204
A000C
48' - 9"
43' - 4"5' - 5"33' - 4"28' - 0"5' - 4"DECK
A205 SETBACK15' - 0"SETBACK
10' - 0"
A3.2
1
A3.22
A3.1
1
A3.1 2
A3.3 2
SETBACK15' - 0"A202
BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 1 1/2"
DW
DW
TRASH
REF
OVEN
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.2A
UPPER LEVEL
CONSTRUCTION
PLAN - UNIT A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT A1P67
VI.A.
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1 B3B2
BA
A3
AA
AB
AC
60' - 5 1/2"
21' - 10 1/2"38' - 7"37' - 9"6' - 6"17' - 1"12' - 5 1/2"1' - 8 1/2"SETBACK15' - 0"MASTER CLOSET
B204
MASTER BATH
B203
MASTER
BEDROOM
B202
MASTER DECK
B205
CLOSET
B208 BATH
B207
GUEST
BEDROOM
B206
DECK
B209
HALL
B201
B206
B202AB203A
B203B
B203C
B207B
B204A
B204B
B202B
B209
B207A
B208
OPEN TO BELOW
A3.22
A3.4
1
A3.42
A3.3
1
A3.3 2
DITCH EASEMENT
10' - 0"SETBACK15' - 0"BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 1 1/2"
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.2B
UPPER LEVEL
CONSTRUCTION
PLAN - UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
UPPER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT B1P68 VI.A.
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1
BA
A3A2A1
AA
AB
AC
48' - 9"
43' - 4"5' - 5"33' - 4"28' - 0"5' - 4"10" / 12"10" / 12"SETBACK15' - 0"SETBACK
10' - 0"
A3.2
1
A3.22
A3.1
1
A3.1 2
A3.3 2
SETBACK15' - 0"BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 1 1/2"
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.3A
ROOF PLAN - UNIT A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLAN - UNIT A1
SKYLIGHT
P69VI.A.
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1 B3B2
BA
A3
AA
AB
AC
60' - 5 1/2"
21' - 10 1/2"38' - 7"37' - 9"6' - 6"17' - 1"12' - 5 1/2"1' - 8 1/2"10" / 12"10" / 12"10" / 12"10" / 12"SETBACK15' - 0"A3.22
A3.4
1
A3.42
A3.3
1
A3.3 2
DITCH EASEMENT
10' - 0"SETBACK15' - 0"BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 1 1/2"
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.3B
ROOF PLAN - UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLAN - UNIT B1P70 VI.A.
B -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
102' -0"
B -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
113' -0"
B -ROOF
122' -0"
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
B1A3A2A1
7' - 6"11' - 0"A23
A8
A102B10" / 12"A20 A19 A18 A17 A16WS-01WS-01
PS-01
METAL CLAD SLIDING DOOR SYSTEM
A202
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
AA AB AC
7' - 6"11' - 0"10" / 12"10" / 12"
A14
A13
A101A
A24
A12 A11 A10 A9
DOOR OPENING8' - 0"PORCH OPENING9' - 9"WS-01
WS-01
WS-01
PS-01
PS-01
PS-01
BREAK IN WINDOW2' - 0"BREAK IN WINDOW2' - 0"A25
PS-01
MATERIAL LEGEND
WS-01 - VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
SIDING
CC-01 - BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
PS-01 - PLATE STEEL SIDING
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.1
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS - UNIT
A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
SOUTH ELEVATION - UNIT A1
1/4" = 1'-0"
WEST ELEVATION - UNIT A2
P71VI.A.
B -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
102' -0"
B -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
113' -0"
B -ROOF
122' -0"
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
B1 A3 A2 A1
11' - 0"7' - 6"10" / 12"A15
A7
A25
A100A
WS-01
WS-01
CC-01
1' - 0"
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
AAABAC
7' - 6"11' - 0"CC-01
WS-01
MATERIAL LEGEND
WS-01 - VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
SIDING
CC-01 - BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
PS-01 - PLATE STEEL SIDING
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.2
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS - UNIT
A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
NORTH ELEVATION - UNIT A1
1/4" = 1'-0"
EAST ELEVATION - UNIT A2
P72VI.A.
B -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
102' -0"
B -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
113' -0"
B -ROOF
122' -0"
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
B1 B3B2A3
9' - 0"11' - 0"B16
B3B4
B17
B18
B5
B6
B19B202B
B20
WS-01
CC-01
PS-01
PS-01
CC-01
PS-01
WS-01
GLASS RAILING
B -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
102' -0"
B -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
113' -0"
B -ROOF
122' -0"
BB BD BEBCBA
9' - 0"11' - 0"10" / 12"WS-01
PS-01
WS-01
CC-01
MATERIAL LEGEND
WS-01 - VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
SIDING
CC-01 - BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
PS-01 - PLATE STEEL SIDING
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.3
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS - UNIT
B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
SOUTH ELEVATION - UNIT B1
1/4" = 1'-0"
WEST ELEVATION - UNIT B2
P73VI.A.
B -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
102' -0"
B -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
113' -0"
B -ROOF
122' -0"
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
B1B3B2 A3
11' - 0"9' - 0"B101
B2
B1
B9
B100
10" / 12"10" / 12"10" / 12"WS-01
CC-01
PS-01
PS-01
WS-01
PS-01
GLASS RAILING
CC-01
PS-01
LOGGIA WIDTH
12' - 4 1/2"
OVERALL WIDTH
61' - 10 1/2"DOOR OPENING8' - 0"LOGGIA HEIGHT9' - 0"FRONT FACADE FRONT FACADE
1' - 0"
INTEGRAL GUTTER
B8
FRONT FACADE WIDTH
61' - 10 1/2"
B10B11
B -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
102' -0"
B -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
113' -0"
B -ROOF
122' -0"
BBBDBEBC BA
9' - 0"11' - 0"B104
B15 B14 B13 B209
B12
B105
CC-01
PS-01
WS-01
MATERIAL LEGEND
WS-01 - VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
SIDING
CC-01 - BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
PS-01 - PLATE STEEL SIDING
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.4
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS - UNIT
B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
NORTH ELEVATION - UNIT B1
1/4" = 1'-0"
EAST ELEVATION - UNIT B2
P74VI.A.
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.0A
PERSPECTIVES -
UNIT A
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
SOUTHWEST PERSPECTIVE
NORTHWEST PERSPECTIVEWS-01 -VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
PS-01 -BLACKENED STEEL
BC-01 -BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
WS-01 -VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
PS-01 -BLACKENED STEEL
BC-01 -BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
WS-01 -VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
PS-01 -BLACKENED STEEL
BC-01 -BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
P75VI.A.
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.0B
PERSPECTIVES -
UNIT B
01.07.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
WS-01 -VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
PS-01 -BLACKENED STEEL
CC-01 -BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
ALLEY PERSPECTIVE
BACK PERSPECTIVEP76 VI.A.
UP
DN
BB
BD
BE
BC
B1
BA
A3A2A1
AA
AB
AC
48' - 9"
43' - 4"5' - 5"33' - 4"28' - 0"5' - 4"ENTRY
A102
GARAGE
A100
A100A
SKYLIGHT
A100B SETBACK15' - 0"SETBACK
10' - 0"
A3.2
1
A3.22
A3.1
1
A3.1 2
A3.3 2
CU CU
CU
CU
CU CU
ELEC.
PANEL
ELEC.
METER
ELEC.
METER
ELEC.
PANEL
GAS
GAS
SETBACK15' - 0"BUILDING SEPARATION
10' - 0"
LIGHTWELL
LOGGIA RECESS
6' - 0"
LIGHTWELL
MUDROOM
A101
GUEST BEDROOM
A103
CL
A104
BATH
A105
MASTER
BEDROOM
A106
MASTER BATH
A107
MASTER CL
A108
A101A
A103A
A104
A105B
A105A
A103B A106B
A107A
A107B A107C
A108
A102
A101B
A106A
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.1A
MAIN LEVEL
CONSTRUCTION
PLAN - UNIT A
02.11.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN - UNIT A1P77
VI.A.
B -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
102' -0"
B -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
113' -0"
B -ROOF
122' -0"
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
B1A3A2A1
7' - 6"11' - 0"A1910" / 12"A16 A15 A14
WS-01
WS-01
METAL CLAD SLIDING DOOR SYSTEM
A202
A13 A12
A6 A103B A106B A5
A -MAIN LEVEL F.F.
100' -0"
A -UPPER LEVEL F.F.
111' -0"
A -ROOF
118' -6"
AA AB AC
7' - 6"11' - 0"10" / 12"10" / 12"
A8
WS-01
WS-01
PS-01
PS-01
BREAK IN WINDOW2' - 0"A9
WS-01
A102
A1
A2
A7
CANOPY HEIGHT9' - 8 1/2"DOOR OPENING HEIGHT8' - 0"MATERIAL LEGEND
WS-01 - VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN
SIDING
CC-01 - BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
PS-01 - PLATE STEEL SIDING
DRAWING DATE:
215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856
ISSUE
DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.1
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS - UNIT
A
02.11.2019FOREST LOOKOUT LOT 401.07.2019 RDS SUBMISSION
1/4" = 1'-0"
SOUTH ELEVATION - UNIT A1
1/4" = 1'-0"
WEST ELEVATION - UNIT A2
P78VI.A.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Mike Kraemer, Senior Planner
THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director
RE: 465 and 557 North Mill Street Rezoning
MEETING DATE: February 19th, 2019
APPLICANT:
North Mill Street, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
Chris Bendon. BendonAdams, LLC
LOCATION & PARCEL ID:
465 and 557 North Mill Street
PID#’s: 273707300048, 273707300013
CURRENT ZONING & USE:
The properties are located within the
Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone
district. There are a variety of “Service Uses” and
“Service, Commercial, and Industrial” uses
presently operating on the two lots.
PROPOSED ZONING & USE:
The Applicant proposes to rezone the properties
to the Mixed Use (MU) zone district which would
allow for a variety of different uses not currently
allowed in the SCI zone district. Development,
redevelopment, or a change in use for the
properties is not proposed at this time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning
Commission provide a referral to the City Council to
deny the request to rezone the subject properties
to the Mixed Use (MU) Zone District.
Figure A. 465 North Mill Street, front façade
Figure B. 465 North Mill Street, rear façade
Figure C. 557 North Mill Street, front façade
P79
VI.B.
Page 2 of 8
LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES:
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval:
Rezoning – pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310.060, Rezoning – Procedure for Amendment. The Planning
and Zoning Commission is tasked with determining if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the
Official Zone District Map, and to provide a recommendation to City Council. City Council is the final review
authority.
BACKGROUND:
The project area includes two parcels within the SCI zone district located at the northwest corner of the intersection
of Puppy Smith Street and N. Mill Street. The gross lot area for 465 N. Mill Street (Lot 1) is 46,353 sq. ft. The gross
lot area for 557 N. Mill Street (Lot 2) is 6,301 sq. ft. Both lots contain a total of 52,654 sq. ft. The two lots are
illustrated in Figure D.
Figure D. Existing conditions survey. Lot 1 (465 N. Mill Street) in blue, Lot 2 (555/557 N. Mill St.) in light green
Lot 1 is developed with a two-story, partially subgrade structure that includes a walk-out configuration on the rear
façade as shown in Figure B. The structure on Lot 1 contains approximately 20,645 sq. ft. of Net Leasable Area. Lot
2 also has a two-story structure; however, the lower level is mostly subgrade. The structure on Lot 2 is smaller and
contains approximately 5,981 sq. ft. of Floor Area and approximately 7,990 sq. ft. of Net Leasable Area. A variety
of Service/Commercial/Industrial uses exist on the two lots, including the following types of business: sports
equipment sales and service, auto and motorcycle repair and service, laundromat/dry cleaning, home contracting
services, and an artist studio. A list of the existing businesses and uses can be found in Exhibit D, “Existing Use Table”
to this memo.
P80
VI.B.
Page 3 of 8
Figure E. Project Location & Vicinity, the subject property is indicated by a white border
Adjacent zone districts near the subject properties, shown in Figure E, include: SCI, Neighborhood Commercial (NC),
Public/Planned Development (PUB/PD), and Park (P). Nearby zone districts include Mixed Use (MU), Academic (A),
Affordable Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD), Medium-Density Residential (R-6), Moderate-Density
Residential (R-15), Low-Density Residential (R-30).
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The Applicant proposes to rezone the subject properties, Lots 1 and 2, from Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) to
Mixed Use (MU). At this time, no development is proposed on the properties.
STAFF EVALUATION:
The review criteria for rezoning considerations in Section 26.310.090 of the Land Use Code are attached hereto as
Exhibit “A”. The review criteria for a rezoning request focuses on two primary areas. The first considers the potential
impact of the request on the built and natural environment. The second considers the compatibility of the proposal
to the surrounding existing land uses, neighborhood characteristics, harmony of the public interest, and the Land
Use Code. Staff responses to applicable Land Use Code standards can be found in Exhibit A of this memo. For P&Z
consideration, Staff has provided the Land Use Code use and dimensional standards for the SCI zone district and
the MU zone district which can be viewed as Exhibit B and Exhibit C, respectively. The Staff evaluation below weighs
the proposal against applicable Land Use Code criteria and includes an analysis of the purpose/intent and
allowed/prohibited uses in both the SCI zone district and the MU zone district.
P81
VI.B.
Page 4 of 8
Allowable Uses:
• The subject properties currently contain uses such as a consignment resale sporting goods business, engine
mechanic service, furniture fabrication/manufacturing, tire replacement/detailing, and a laundromat. A
total of twenty-one (21) businesses operate on the subject properties, identified in Exhibit D, Existing Use
Table. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.710.160: SCI Zone District and Land Use Code Section
26.104.110: SCI Use Category, all existing businesses operating on the subject properties are allowed uses
and are conforming in the SCI zone district.
• Certain existing uses on the subject properties are permitted in both the SCI zone district and the MU zone
district. For example, “laundry and dry cleaning” and “light maintenance and repair” are allowed uses that
overlap in both the SCI zone district and the MU zone district. If the rezoning request were approved, these
uses would remain conforming. In contrast, some of the existing uses on the subject properties are
specifically targeted as allowed in the SCI zone district while prohibited in the MU zone district. Examples
of these uses are “manufacturing” and “heavy maintenance and repair”. Should the subject properties be
rezoned to MU, existing manufacturing and heavy maintenance/repair businesses would become non-
conforming.
• While certain permitted uses have overlap between the two zone districts, in contrast, the MU zone district
contains certain allowed uses that are prohibited in the SCI zone district. Examples of these uses include
office, multi-family/single family/duplex residential, lodging, specialty retail uses, and restaurant/bar.
Although mixed-use by name, the MU zone district states that residential and commercial uses cannot be
combined in a single building. In actuality, commercial and residential uses are required to be standalone.
Though no development plan or change of use request is proposed in association with this rezoning request,
Staff is concerned of the possibility that certain allowed MU zone district uses may be more desirable and
potentially displace existing SCI uses. This sentiment is similarly acknowledged in the 2018 “Commercial,
Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines” – River Approach Area, page 86. Displaced
SCI uses would have limited ability to relocate due to the restricted amount of SCI zoned land with the City
of Aspen. An analysis of existing SCI zoned lands is provided later in this memo.
Purpose and Intent of the SCI zone district and the MU zone district:
• Pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.710.160, the SCI zone district purpose clause states the following:
The S/C/I zone supports Aspen Area Community Plan policies related to a sustainable, local
serving economy and the preservation of a diversity of commercial opportunities for locals
and visitors. In response to the decreased intensity of commercial uses in the zone and relative
distance from the CC and C1 zones, both multi-modal and automobile parking improvements
are appropriate on site in the S/C/I. In order to enhance the City’s commercial diversity, the
zone allows for uses not found in other zones including light industrial, manufacturing,
production, repair and similar service-related uses. The S/C/I zone is designed to provide
commercial space to those uses not appropriate in other commercial zones, but which provide
an essential or unique service to support the local economy. Flexibility and adaptability are
important features of the zone to respond to changing commercial sector dynamics and meet
the space needs of the City’s service, creative and production economies.
Light industrial, manufacturing, and repair uses are exclusive to the SCI zone district and provide unique
services uses that support the local economy. In general, the existing uses identified in Attachment D are
in concert with the stated SCI purpose and the subject properties are appropriately zoned SCI.
P82
VI.B.
Page 5 of 8
• Though not a regulatory document, the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) provides aspirational guidance for
long term goals of the Aspen community. The SCI purpose statement identifies an AACP goal to establish
diverse commercial opportunities for locals and visitors which, in turn, encourages a balanced commercial mix
that meets basic community needs. The current SCI zoning on the subject properties and existing uses
accomplish this AACP goal. If approved, the proposed rezoning represents significant loss of SCI zoned lands
within the City of Aspen. Eliminating SCI zoned lands is not consistent with the goals of AACP.
• Pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.710.180, the Mixed-Use zone district purpose clause states the
following:
“The Mixed Use (MU) zone serves as a transition from the more intense commercial areas of
the CC and C-1 zones, and the residential and lodging zones surrounding Main Street. By
allowing for a mix of commercial and residential uses and smaller-scale development, the
Mixed Use zone reflects Aspen’s historic character and provides different economic and
residential opportunities from more traditional commercial zones. Particularly along Main
Street, the Mixed Use zone serves as a buffer from the traffic of Highway 82 while allowing for
smaller scale commercial and residential opportunities.
Buildings in the Mixed Use zone consist primarily of commercial, service and office uses on the
ground floor, and residential and office uses on upper floors and off of the primary street
frontage. Uses in the MU zone should not erode the character of the neighborhood or create
excessive impacts to the surrounding residential and lodging zone. Standalone residential uses
are permitted on properties as a reflection of the historic residential nature of the zone
district.”
The MU zone district purpose statement contains specific language regarding its appropriateness to enable
commercial, service, and offices uses within buildings. The MU purpose statement does not identify light
industrial, manufacturing, and repair uses. The intent and purpose of the SCI zone district and the MU zone
district are not intended to be consistent or interchangeable. Current uses on the subject properties are
unique to the SCI zone district and are inconsistent with the purpose of the MU zone district. The proposal
to rezone the subject properties to MU represents a fundamental difference from the purpose and intent
of the SCI zone district.
Location and Surrounding Land Uses
• The MU zone district principally encompasses properties along Main Street and its purpose statement
acknowledges its appropriateness as a buffer from traffic along Hwy 82. The subject properties are not
located within close vicinity to Main Street and are accessed off N. Mill Street. North Mill Street does not
experience Hwy 82 traffic levels.
• Surrounding businesses and uses include a grocery store, a post office, academic uses (Aspen Center for
Environmental Studies), public uses (Sanitation District offices and housing), interior design and planning
studios (this use is specifically limited to the Andrews-McFarlin Subdivision), and Rio Grande Park. None of
the surrounding properties are zoned MU Zone District. Approval of the rezoning request would create an
island of MU zoning in the neighborhood and potentially enable uses that are not compatible or transitional
in nature with the immediate vicinity of the subject properties.
• The “Civic Center Master Plan”, which was adopted by City Council in 2006, is a regulatory document that
contains a section relating to sustainable locally serving businesses. The Plan analyzed the subject area,
P83
VI.B.
Page 6 of 8
envisioning a redevelopment scenario similar to the Obermeyer redevelopment, including renovation of SCI
space, underground parking, pedestrian linkages, affordable housing, and aesthetic improvements. In contrast
to the direction for affordable housing in this plan, allowed residential uses in the MU zone include single family
residences, duplexes, and standalone multi-family units. Though the application does not include a
development plan and is solely a request to rezone the subject properties, it should be noted that free market
residential development is inconsistent with the direction of the Civic Center Master Plan.
Character Areas:
• The properties are subject to the 2018 “Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and
Guidelines”. Properties subject to these standards are located within specific “Character Areas” which
provide guidance relating historical uses, development patterns, and architecture. The subject properties
are within the River Approach Character Area which functions, in part, as a light industrial, civic, and service
zone. This area is transitional between the more densely developed urban/commercial downtown and
residential areas north of the Roaring Fork River. The majority of MU zoned properties are found in the Main
Street Historic District Character Area and Neighborhood Mixed Use Character Area. In general, the historic
uses and patterns of designated Character Areas drive the appropriate design, development, and site planning
of their respective area. Main Street was developed primary as a residential area, while the Neighborhood
Mixed Use areas developed as a transition from the commercial core to less intense commercial/residential
zones. Figures F-H provide a representative design palate of each Character Area.
Figure F. Main Street Historic District Figure G. Neighborhood Mixed Use
P84
VI.B.
Page 7 of 8
Figure H. River Approach
• The character of the subject properties in connection to the allowed uses, architecture, and relationship of
buildings to public rights of way is inconsistent with the Main Street Historic District Character Area and the
Neighborhood Mixed Use Character Area where MU zoned land appropriately exists. The subject properties
do not have similar development histories or patterns with these character areas which creates inconsistency
with the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The character of the subject properties is squarely
consistent with the designated River Approach Character Area, which is comprised primarily of the SCI zone
district, Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone district, and Public zone district.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As noted above, the review criteria for rezoning are attached as Exhibit “A”. Staff finds the proposed rezoning does
not comply with review criteria “A”, which considers if the proposed rezoning is compatible with the existing
surrounding zone districts and neighborhood character. Staff also finds the proposal does not comply with review
criteria “D” which requires that a rezoning be in harmony with the public interest and intent of the Land Use Code.
Because the proposal does not meet these criteria, Staff does not support the rezoning of the subject property. In
addition, the proposal would:
• Represent a fundamental change from the purpose and intent of SCI zoning.
• Result in significant reduction of available SCI zoned area within the City of Aspen. Reducing SCI zoned
lands is inconsistent with the AACP.
• Create non-conforming uses on the subject properties.
• Not be within the context of the designated River Approach Character Area.
• Be inconsistent with the 2006 Civic Master Plan.
Staff recommends that the P&Z recommend denial to City Council, as outlined in the draft resolution.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
“I move to make a recommendation of denial to City Council for the rezoning of 465 and 557 North Mill Street from
the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone district to the Mixed Use (MU) zone district as detailed in draft
Resolution _____, Series of 2019.”
P85
VI.B.
Page 8 of 8
EXHIBITS:
A. Review Criteria
B. Land Use Code Section 26.710.160: SCI zone district
C. Land Use Code Section 26.710.180: MU zone district
D. Existing Business/Use Matrix
E. Application
P86
VI.B.
Page 1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. __
(SERIES OF 2019)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PROVIDING A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR
REZONING OF PROPERTY COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 465 AND 557 N. MILL
STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A; CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO.
PARCEL ID: 273707300048 and 273707300013
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has received an application from
North Mill Street, LLC (Applicant), represented by Chris Bendon, BendonAdams, LLC,
requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission provide a recommendation to the City Council
for a Rezoning of property located at 465 and 557 N. Mill Street (legally described in Exhibit A
of this Resolution) from the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone district to the Mixed Use
(MU) zone district; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.310.060 of the Land Use Code, Rezoning shall be
approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council, after receiving a
recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the
Community Development Department recommended denial of the application; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the
zoning proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendation for the Community Development Director, the
applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed
public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 19th, 2019 the Planning
and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. ___, Series 2019, by a _____ to ____ (__-__)
vote, recommending the Aspen City Council deny the proposed Rezoning of 465 and 557 N.
Mill Street; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that pursuant to Land Use Code
Section 26.310.090(A) the rezoning proposal is not compatible with surrounding zone districts
and land uses, when considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics; and, the
Planning and Zoning Commission further finds that the proposed rezoning is inconsistent with
the goals and statements of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), the 2006 Civic Center
Master Plan, and the 2018 Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and
Guidelines – River Approach Area; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission further finds that pursuant to Land
Use Code Section 26.310.090(D), the proposed rezoning and subsequent reduction of SCI zoned
P87
VI.B.
Page 2 of 4
land, which allows essential uses that provide basic community needs, is inconsistent with the
community character, the public interest, and the intent of this Title.
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution
furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a
recommendation to the Aspen City Council to deny the proposed Rezoning request, pursuant to
the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, for 465 and 557
N. Mill Street, as listed below.
Section 1: Rezoning
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends the City Council deny the proposed
Rezoning of 465 and 557 N. Mill Street to the Mixed Use zone district because the proposal does
not comply with the applicable review criteria.
Section 2:
This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any
action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 3:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
P88
VI.B.
Page 3 of 4
DENIED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this ___ day of
February, 2019.
______________________________
Spencer McKnight, Chair
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
_______________________________ _______________________________
James R. True, City Attorney Janine Stickle, Records Manager
P89
VI.B.
Resolution __, Series 2019
Exhibit A
Legal Description
Page 4 of 4
465 and 557 North Mill Street.
“Parcel A” PID #2737-073-000-48 & “Parcel B” PID #2737-073-000-13, legally described
as:
PARCEL A:
A tract of land being part of a tract previously described in Book 177 at Page 620 in the
Northwest Quarter South Quarter Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the
Sixth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a point being 203.00 feet
North 84°19' East from monument "0-64A" set by L.S. 2568, monument "0-6A" is 1124.96
feet South 39°58'22" East from the West quarter corner, Section 7, Township 10 South,
Range 84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian (1954 Brass Cap); thence North 84°19' East
95.00 feet; thence South 05°41' East 66.33 feet; thence South 84°19' West 95.00 feet; thence
North 05°41 West 66.33 feet to the Point of Beginning.
EXCEPTING therefrom parcels conveyed to the City of Aspen, a municipal corporation by
deed recorded December 18, 1978 in Book 360 at Page 532 and 533. City of Aspen, County
of Pitkin, Colorado
PARCEL B:
A tract of land situated in the Northwest ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 7, Township 10
South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., described as follows: Beginning at a point from
whence the West ¼ corner of said Section 7 bears N 39°58'22" W 1124.96 feet, said point
being the Southwesterly corner of tract of land described in Book 177 at Page 618; thence
on a curve to the left having a radius of 668.00 feet a distance of 222.1 feet the chord of
which bears S 25°40'02" E 221.1 feet, along the Northeasterly line of a tract of land
described in Book 276 at Page 604; thence S 66°48'31" E 151 feet along the Northeasterly
line of said tract of land described in Book 276 at Page 604 to a point on the Northwesterly
line of tract of land described in Book 180 at Page 345; thence N 19°05'07" E 240.00 feet
along said Northwesterly line to the most Northerly corner of said tract of land in Book 180
at Page 345; thence N 10°32'30" W 63.00 feet to the Southeasterly corner of said tract of
land described in Book 177 at Page 618; thence N 84°19' W 5.00 feet; thence S 05°41' E
66.33 feet along the Easterly line of a tract of land described in Book 293 at Page 873;
thence S 84°19' W 95.00 feet along the Southerly line of said tract of land described in Book
293 at Page 873; thence N 05°41' W 66.33 feet along the Westerly line of said tract of land
described in Book 293 at Page 873 to a point on the Southerly line of said tract of land
described in Book 117 at Page 618; thence S 84°19' W 203.00 feet along said Southerly line
to the Place of Beginning.
EXCEPTING therefrom that portion described in Deed to the City of Aspen recorded
December 21, 1976 in Book 321 at Page 797, and also excepting therefrom that portion
described in Deed to the City of Aspen recorded December 28, 1978 in Book 360 at Page
533, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, Colorado
P90
VI.B.
1
Exhibit A
Review Criteria
26.310.090. Rezoning - Standards of review.
In reviewing an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning and
Zoning Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses,
considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Response: The applicant is proposing to change the underlying zoning from Service Commercial
Industrial (SCI) to Mixed Use (MU).
As shown on Figure E in the Staff Memo, the adjacent properties are SCI, Neighborhood Commercial
(NC), Public/Planned Development (PUB/PD), and Park (P). Nearby zone districts include Mixed Use
(MU), Academic (A), Affordable Housing/Planned Development (AH/PD), Medium-Density Residential
(R-6), Moderate-Density Residential (R-15), Low-Density Residential (R-30).
A variety of “Service” and “Service Commercial Industrial” uses exist on the two lots, including the
following types of businesses: sports equipment sales and service, auto and motorcycle repair and
service, laundromat/dry cleaning, home contracting services, and an artist studio. A total of twenty-
one (21) businesses are located on the subject properties. If the property were to be rezoned from SCI
to MU, some uses and associated businesses would be considered non-conforming. Current uses and
businesses on the subject property are outlined in Exhibit D. Existing Use Table. Surrounding
businesses include Clark’s Market, the post office, Aspen Center for Environmental Studies, and Rio
Grande Park.
The project area lies in the River Approach Character Area. According to the recently adopted
Commercial Design Guidelines, this area has historically functioned as an industrial zone. Today, the
area is transitional between the urban fabric of more densely developed commercial and residential
areas to the natural environment. Design of buildings are to consider fenestration and design
elements that reflect the industrial heritage of the area, which was formally home to the Rio Grande
Railroad, a brewery, a foundry, hydroelectric plant, and mining activities often associated with
Aspen’s silver mining past.
While the application does not have a redevelopment component, it is important to consider the
neighborhood character of the River Approach District, where the subject properties exist, to the Main
Street Historic District and the Neighborhood Mixed Use Character Areas, where nearly all of the
Mixed Use zoned areas are found. The Main Street Historic District is substantially different with
regards to historic development pattern to the River Approach area. Where the River Approach area
was industrial, the Main Street Historic District was almost exclusively residential, historically
developed with single-family homes facing Main with small sheds and carriage houses along the
alleys. Today, there are offices and multi-family residential buildings within the District. The
Neighborhood Mixed Use bookends downtown and serves as a transition area between commercial
and residential areas. The Neighborhood Mixed Use area is divided into two areas, East and West.
While both are characterized by residential development interspersed by office and service use, the
East is predominantly two story multi-family residential, whereas the West is more diverse with
regards to heights and uses, including lodge, commercial, residential and office uses. Rezoning the
property to MU could allow for single family or duplex residential development, which is inconsistent
with the historic development context of the immediate vicinity and the River Approach Character
Area.
P91
VI.B.
2
The River Approach area is devoid of alleys and does not follow the grid pattern of either the Main
Street Historic District or the Neighborhood Mixed Use character areas. Contextually speaking, the MU
Zone District is inconsistent with the character of the River Approach Character Area. The historic uses
and patterns of each Character Area drive the appropriate design, development, and site planning of
their respective area. The subject properties are not congruent with the Character Areas associated
with MU zoning.
The rezoning of the subject property is not compatible with surrounding zone districts and uses, when
considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. Staff finds that this criterion is not
met.
B. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public
facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of
such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water
supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Response: No development is proposed at this time. Rezoning from SCI to MU would reduce the
maximum height and maximum floor area for the subject properties. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse
impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Response: Staff does not anticipate any significant adverse impacts to the natural environment
as a result of this proposal. As mentioned in criterion B, there is no development proposed at this time,
and rezoning to the MU zone district represents a reduction of maximum allowed floor area and
height. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
D. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character
in the City and in harmony with the public interest and the intent of this Title.
Staff response: The rezoning of the project area to the MU zone district would reduce the available SCI
zoned land, and in addition, represents a loss of land deemed appropriate for Service Commercial and
Industrial zoning. The Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) speaks to preservation of commercial
diversity in the following standards:
V.1 Encourage a commercial mix that is balanced, diverse and vital and meets the needs of
year-round residents and visitors.
V.2 Facilitate the sustainability of essential businesses that provide basic community needs.
The rezoning of this property would significantly reduce the available land for SCI uses. These uses
include automotive repair, manufacturing/fabrication, and other uses that provide essential services
to the community. A reduction in these uses would result in a loss of basic community needs. Rezoning
the properties to the MU zone district has the potential to displace SCI uses with possibility more
desirable allowed uses.
Additionally, this area is subject to the 2006 Civic Master Plan, which is a regulatory document.
Section One of the Civic Master Plan focuses on sustaining locally serving businesses that have slowly
moved from Aspen to the Aspen Airport Business Center and further down valley. The subject
P92
VI.B.
3
properties include several non-retail, service-oriented businesses owned and patronized by locals. The
Plan envisioned that redevelopment of the project area would emulate the Obermeyer development.
Specifically, the Plan envisioned redevelopment would serve as a renovation of SCI space, provide
underground parking, create pedestrian linkages, develop affordable housing, and aesthetically
improve the area with architecture that reflects the industrial heritage of the area while integrating
the Roaring Fork River area in design elements and site planning.
While no development is proposed at this time, rezoning the property from SCI to MU would create a
number of non-conforming uses and structures on both Lots 1 and 2. While it appears there would not
be any non-conforming floor area issues, a rezoning would create setback encroachments as shown in
Figure 1. The Applicant has indicated that if the rezoning request is successful, portions of the existing
building within the new setbacks would be demolished so that setback compliance is achieved.
Table 1. Dimensional Requirements
SCI MU Subject Area1
Maximum Floor Area 118,471.5 sq. ft. 52,654 sq. ft./78,981 sq.
ft.2
Not provided
Setback, front yard No requirement 10 feet/5 feet3 No requirement
Setback, side yard No requirement 5 Feet No requirement
Setback, rear yard No Requirement 5 Feet No requirement
Maximum height 35 feet 28 feet Not provided
1 The analysis was conducted on the aggregate of the two parcels to simplify the discussion
2 Cumulative FAR of 1:1 for all uses is allowed by right, and a FAR of 1:5 may be established by Special
Review.
3 May be reduced to five (5) feet by Special Review
Figure 1. Setback encroachment locations (highlighted in orange)
P93
VI.B.
4
The proposed amendment is inconsistent with and incompatible with the community
character as envisioned by community wide planning, is not in concert with the public interest
and intent of the Land Use Code, nor is it aligned with the aspirations of the AACP.
Furthermore, the Civic Master Plan, which was adopted by the Aspen City Council in
December of 2006 and is a regulatory document, identifies the project area as SCI, and
relevant core principals including “affordable commercial space (that) ensures the viability of
civic functions and the viability of town”. Rezoning this area from SCI to MU would further
deplete service, commercial, and industrial zoned commercial land within the City of Aspen.
Staff finds this criterion to not be met.
P94
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, SCI zone
Page 1
26.710.160 Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I).
A.Purpose. The S/C/I zone supports Aspen Area Community Plan policies related to a
sustainable, local serving economy and the preservation of a diversity of commercial
opportunities for locals and visitors. In response to the decreased intensity of commercial uses
in the zone and relative distance from the CC and C1 zones, both multi-modal and automobile
parking improvements are appropriate on site in the S/C/I. In order to enhance the City’s
commercial diversity, the zone allows for uses not found in other zones including light
industrial, manufacturing, production, repair and similar service-related uses. The S/C/I zone
is designed to provide commercial space to those uses not appropriate in other commercial
zones, but which provide an essential or unique service to support the local economy.
Flexibility and adaptability are important features of the zone to respond to changing
commercial sector dynamics and meet the space needs of the City’s service, creative and
production economies.
B.Permitted Uses.
1.The following uses may have, in combination, a limited percent of the floor area,
devoted to retail sales, showroom, or customer reception, and such uses shall be
ancillary to the primary commercial use. This floor area percentage may be
increased through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission,
pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and according to the standards of Section
26.710.160(E)1. Where retail sales are allowed, this shall be limited to General
Retail uses and may include formula uses that fall in the General Retail category.
% retail sales,
showroom, or
customer reception
(maximum – net
leasable area)
Uses include the manufacturing, repair, customization,
servicing, alteration, detailing, rental or sale of consumer goods,
such as:
100% •Vehicle sales.
•Building materials, components, hardware, fixtures, interior
finishes and equipment.
•Fabric and sewing supply.
•Household appliances such as ranges, refrigerators,
dishwashers, etc.
•Outdoor recreational items, which may be in combination with a
service use related to guiding or touring.
25% •Animal boarding facility.
•Animal grooming establishment.
•Artist studio.
•Brewery and brewing supply.
•Coffee roasting and supply.
•Commercial dry cleaning.
•Commercial Kitchen or Bakery.
•Design Studio (limited to the Andrews-McFarlin Subdivision).
•Laundromat.
Exhibit B
P95
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, SCI zone
Page 2
% retail sales,
showroom, or
customer reception
(maximum – net
leasable area)
Uses include the manufacturing, repair, customization,
servicing, alteration, detailing, rental or sale of consumer goods,
such as:
• Locksmith.
• Marijuana Cultivation Facility, Marijuana Product
Manufacturing Facility, or Marijuana Testing Facility.
• Consumer electronics service and repair.
• Post Office branch.
• Printing and copy center.
• Shipping, packing and receiving services.
• Veterinary clinic.
10% • Automobile washing facility.
• Building/landscape maintenance facility.
• Warehousing and storage.
2. Primary Care Physician’s Office Uses permitted:
a. On Upper Floors, pursuant to Section 26.710.160 (D)11(b).
b. Limited to a cap of 3,500 square feet at the Obermeyer Place PD, upon execution
of an Insubstantial PD Amendment.
3. Permitted Accessory Uses:
a) Service yard accessory to a permitted use.
b) Sales and rental accessory and incidental to a permitted use.
c) Accessory buildings and uses.
d) Home occupations and Vacation Rentals: Home Occupations and Vacation
Rentals are permitted only in legally established residential units.
e) Offices, accessory to a permitted or conditional use, may occupy up to 10% of
a commercial unit.
C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the
Service/Commercial/ Industrial (SCI) zone district, subject to the procedures established
in Chapter 26.425.050 Procedures for Review, and the standards established in Section
26.710.160(F). The following Conditional uses shall not be subject to Section
26.425.045, Standards applicable to formula uses; exemptions; determination of formula
uses.
1. Affordable Housing Units: Affordable housing is permitted as a conditional use where
accessory to a commercial use on the property or required for on-site affordable
housing mitigation requirements. See 26.710.160.D.11 for affordable housing Floor
Area Ratio requirements. Affordable housing created pursuant to this subsection is
not eligible to be used for the creation of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit,
pursuant to Chapter 26.540, unless for a fraction of a unit.
P96
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, SCI zone
Page 3
2. Free-Market Residential Units: No new Free-Market Residential Units may be
established. Free-Market Residential units are permitted on any level if they were
legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development Order,
or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance 29, Series 2016.
3. Consignment retail establishment.
4. Commercial Parking Facility, pursuant to Section 26.515.
5. Gasoline service station.
6. Grocery store.
D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all
permitted and conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (SCI) zone district.
The dimensional standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and
mixed-use developments are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be
achieved for all developments. Site constraints, historic resources, on-site mitigation and
replacement requirements, and other factors may prevent development from achieving
some or all of the maximum allowable dimensional standards.
1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): 3,000
2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement.
3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement.
4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): No requirement.
5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): No requirement.
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): No requirement.
7. Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06.
8. Maximum height: Thirty-five (35) feet.
9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No Requirement.
10. Pedestrian Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.412.
11. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively
up to a total maximum FAR of 2.25:1. Achieving the maximum floor area ratio is
subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements,
pedestrian amenity requirements and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the
maximum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations.
a. Commercial Uses: 2.25:1.
P97
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, SCI zone
Page 4
b. Primary Care Physician’s Office uses: .25:1 FAR, only if a minimum of .75:1
FAR of Commercial uses, listed in Section 26.710.160(B)1-3, exist on the same
parcel.
c. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: Greater of existing FAR or .5:1.
d. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: Limited to the existing free-market multi-
family FAR. No expansion to FAR shall be permitted except at-grade patios, and
decks (other than roof-top decks), balconies, exterior stairways, trellis, and other
similar features up to 15% of the total free-market residential floor area. Any
subsequent reduction in floor area occupied by such residential use shall be deemed
a new limitation and the use shall not thereafter be enlarged to occupy a greater floor
area. Free-market residential units shall not be able to utilize any exemptions to
floor area outlined in Section 26.575.020(D), Measuring Floor Area, except as noted
above.
12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling unit size (square feet):
a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation.
b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi-family housing: Individual units shall be
limited to 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area.
c) Free-Market multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 2,000 sq.
ft. of net livable area. Combination of Free-Market residential units is permitted,
but subject to the net livable size limitations herein, as well as other provisions
of this title.
d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi-family unit
sizes may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development
Right Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following:
1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is
extinguished.
2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units.
However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring
development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500
additional square feet may be applied per unit).
3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development
rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or
the use.
E. Special Review Standards. Whenever the dimensional standards of a proposed
development within the SCI Zone District are subject to Special Review, the development
application shall be processed as a Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.050. The
following additional criteria apply:
P98
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, SCI zone
Page 5
1. To increase the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom, or
customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and appropriateness
for such additional space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCI
Zone District.
2. The additional approved percentage for a specific use shall be limited to that use and
not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space.
F. Conditional Use Review Standards.
1. Retail, Showroom or Customer Reception Area. In addition to meeting the standards
in Chapter 26.425, Conditional Use, the following Standards shall be met:
a. For consignment retail establishment, commercial parking facility (pursuant to
Chapter 26.575), and gasoline service station, the Commission shall establish the
appropriate amount of floor area to be devoted to retail sales, showroom, or
customer reception as a condition of conditional use review.
b. To establish the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom,
or customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and
appropriateness for the space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of
the SCI Zone District. The approved percentage for a specific use is limited to that
use and not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space.
2. Multi-Family Housing. In addition to meeting the standards in Chapter 26.425,
Conditional Use, the following Standards shall be met.
a. The applicant must demonstrate that the residential use and individual units are
substantially removed and physically separated from Commercial Uses on the same
parcel, to the extent practicable, so as to isolate residential uses from commercial
impacts and to adequately provide for on-loading, off-loading, circulation and
parking for commercial uses.
G. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek
that was in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) zone district on January 1, 2015, is
subject to the provisions of Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use
approvals, of the City of Aspen Charter.
(Ord. No. 2-1999, §1; Ord. No. 22-2005, §1; Ord. No. 4-2008; Ord. No. 27-2010, §4; Ord.
No. 39-2013, §3; Ord. No. 20-2015, §4; Ord. No. 29, 2016, §3; Ord. No. 6, 2017, §4-5)
P99
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 1
26.710.180 Mixed-Use (MU).
A.Purpose. The Mixed Use (MU) zone serves as a transition from the more intense
commercial areas of the CC and C-1 zones, and the residential and lodging zones surrounding
Main Street. By allowing for a mix of commercial and residential uses and smaller-scale
development, the Mixed Use zone reflects Aspen’s historic character and provides different
economic and residential opportunities from more traditional commercial zones. Particularly
along Main Street, the Mixed Use zone serves as a buffer from the traffic of Highway 82 while
allowing for smaller scale commercial and residential opportunities.
Buildings in the Mixed Use zone consist primarily of commercial, service and office uses on
the ground floor, and residential and office uses on upper floors and off of the primary street
frontage. Uses in the MU zone should not erode the character of the neighborhood or create
excessive impacts to the surrounding residential and lodging zone. Standalone residential uses
are permitted on properties as a reflection of the historic residential nature of the zone district.
B.Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone
District:
1.On historic landmark properties: Bed and breakfast.
2.General retail uses.
3.Specialty retail uses.
4.Restaurant, bar and entertainment uses.
5.Service uses.
6.Office uses.
7.Lodging.
8.Arts, cultural, civic and community uses.
9.Public uses.
10.Recreational uses.
11.Academic uses.
12.Affordable multi-family residential.
13.Free-market multi-family housing is permitted in a mixed use building if the housing
was legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development
Order, or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance 29, Series 2016. No
new Free-Market Residential Units may be established in mixed-use buildings.
14.Free-market multi-family residential when a stand-alone use, or in conjunction with
affordable multi-family residential.
15.Single-family residence, Duplex residence, or Two (2) detached single-family
residences. Accessory dwelling unit in a separate building accessed off the rear of a lot
as an accessory use.
16.Home occupations.
Exhibit C
P100
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 2
17. Accessory uses and structures.
18. Storage accessory to a permitted use.
19. Vacation rentals. Pursuant to Section 26.575.220
20. Formula uses, except in the Main Street Historic District
(Ord. No. 6, 2017)
C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Mixed-Use
(MU) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425:
1. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515.
2. Automobile showroom and dealership.
3. Formula uses in the Main Street Historic District, subject to the provisions contained in
Section 26.425.045.
4. Lodge, Boutique
D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all
permitted and conditional uses in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District. The dimensional
standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and mixed-use developments
are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be achieved for all developments. Site
constraints, historic resources, on-site mitigation and replacement requirements, and other
factors may prevent development from achieving some or all of the maximu m allowable
dimensional standards.
1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): 3,000.
2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet):
a. Detached residential dwellings: 4,500. 3,000 for historic landmark
properties.
b. Duplex dwellings (square feet): 4,500. 3,000 for historic landmark
properties.
c. All other uses: Not applicable.
3. Minimum lot width (feet): 30.
4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 10, which may be reduced to 5, pursuant to
Special Review, Chapter 26.430.
5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): 5.
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 5.
7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06.
8. Maximum height:
a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: 25 feet.
b. All other uses: 28 feet.
P101
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 3
9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): 10.
10. Pedestrian amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.412.
11. Floor Area Ratio (FAR):
a. The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively and individually when
part of a commercial, lodging, or mixed-use development, as follows:
Use
Maximum
(allowed by right)
Maximum by special review
(see Subsection 26.430.040.A)
Main Street
Historic
District
All Other
Locations
Cumulative total of all uses 1:1 1.25:1 1.5:1
Commercial 1:1 1.25:1 1.5:1
Civic 1:1 1.25:1 1.5:1
Lodging 0.75:1 1:1 1:1
Affordable Housing No limitation other than cumulative total of all uses
b. The following FAR schedule applies to affordable housing and free-market
residential uses when developed as the only use of the parcel:
i. Affordable Housing, multi-family housing: Limited to cumulative total outlined
in Section 26.710.180.11.a, above.
ii. Free-market, affordable housing: 0.5:1, which may be increased to 0.75:1 if
affordable housing floor area equal to 100% of the free-market residential floor
area is developed on the same parcel.
c. The following FAR schedule applies to single-family and duplex uses when
developed as the only use of the parcel:
i. Detached residential and duplex dwellings established prior to the adoption of
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005: 100% of the allowable floor area of an
equivalent-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.)
Receipt of a development order shall constitute the date the use was
established. Replacement after demolition shall not effect a new establishment
date for the purposes of this Section. City historic transferable development
rights shall not permit additional floor area for detached residential and duplex
dwellings.
ii. Detached residential and duplex dwellings established after the adoption of
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005: 80% of the allowable floor area of an
equivalent-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.)
City historic transferable development rights shall not permit additional floor
area for detached residential and duplex dwellings.
12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling unit size (square feet):
P102
VI.B.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 4
a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation.
b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi-family housing: Individual units shall be
limited to 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area.
c) Free-Market multi-family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 2,000 sq. ft.
of net livable area. Combination of Free-Market residential units is permitted, but
subject to the net livable size limitations herein, as well as other provisions of this
title.
d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi-family unit sizes
may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right
Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following:
1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is
extinguished.
2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units.
However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring
development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500
additional square feet may be applied per unit).
3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development
rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or the
use.
13. Commercial/residential ratio: When development includes mixed-uses, the total
residential net livable area shall be no greater than 150% the total commercial net
leasable and lodging net livable area located on the same parcel.
E. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek that
was in the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district on January 1, 2015, is subject to the provisions of
Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use approvals, of the City of
Aspen Charter.
(Ord. No. 56-2000, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 25-2001, §5 [part]; Ord. 1-2002, §20; Ord. No. 7-
2005, §1 [part]; Ord. No. 12-2006, 13; Ord. No. 11, 2007; Ord. No. 27-2010, §4; Ord. No.34-
2011, §16; Ord. No. 17-2014, §2; Ord. No. 20-2015, §6; Ord. No. 29, 2016, §5; Ord. No. 6,
2017, Ord. No. 23, 2017)
P103
VI.B.
Exhibit B
Existing Businesses/Use Table
557 North
Mill Street
Business Name Description
General Service
Foundation
Human Rights
Organization
Lux Aspen Property Management
and concierge Service
Athen Builders LLC General contracting
A2 Associates LLC Construction and
Property Management
Unknown tenant Unknown use
465 North
Mill Street
Business Name Description
Aspen Velo Bike Shop
rental/repair
Walter’s Carpets Carpet installation
and repair
Endless Pawsibilties Dog Training
Aspen Laundry Laundromat and
green dry cleaner
MPS (Millennium Pack
and Ship)
Packing and shipping
Aspen Hatter Custom hat
fabrication and sales
Aspen Motorworx Motorcycle and
snowmobile repair
Aspen Tire & Detail Automobile service
Anna Tazebenski Artist studio
John Francis Furniture fabrication
studio
Gorsuch Ski Service Ski services
Shelly Hamill, Artist Artist studio
Lift Up Non-profit,
humanitarian
assistance
The FJ Company Automobile
showroom and sales
We Cycle Public bicycle rental
Replay Sports Sports equipment
consignment and
repair
Reeds Luggage Repair Travel bag repair
1 vacant space for
lease
P104
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
July 12, 2017
Updated January 2, 2019
Ms. Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Aspen
130 So. Galena St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: Rezone request for 465 and 557 North Mill Street
Ms. Garrow:
Please accept this application for a rezone of the properties located at 465 and 557 North
Mill Street. The properties are currently zoned Service, Commercial, Industrial (SCI). The
proposal is to rezone the properties to Mixed Use (MU). Both properties are owned by
North Mill Street LLC.
465 North Mill Street (parcel ID# 2737-073-000-48) is 46,535 sf in size and 43,544 sf with
slope reduction using predevelopment topography. The property comprises one large
building of about 20,645 sf of net leasable area. The lower level is partially subgrade,
meaning a portion of the entire lower level does not count toward floor area. The building
(shown below) contains Service and Commercial Uses as described in the City of Aspen
Land Use Code.
Figure 1: 465 N. Mill Street, front façade. Figure 2: 465 N. Mill Street, rear façade.
Exhibit E
P105
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
557 North Mill Street (parcel ID# 2737-073-000-13) is 6,301 sf in size and comprises one
building of about 7,990 sf of net leasable area and 5,081 sf of Floor Area. The lower level
is partially subgrade meaning a portion of the lower level does not count toward floor area.
The building (shown below) contains Service and Commercial Uses as well.
Background: Both 465 North Mill Street and 557 North Mill Street are zoned Service
Commercial Industrial Zone District (SCI). City Council Ordinance 11 of 1975 established
a new set of zone districts including SCI. These were located north of Main Street as
shown in Figure 4.
A review of uses in the SCI Zone District since 1970 show a clear trend away from
industrial/light industrial uses, and toward more office-type uses, specifically in the area of
architecture. The door was first inched open by adding “Artist’s Studio,” and then burst
open when architecture was interpreted to fall under that use. More recently the use was
expanded to permit “design studios” although the difference between a design studio other
types of professional offices is slight.
Figure 3: 557 N. Mill Street, front façade.
P106
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
= SCI Zone District
= Subject properties
(zoned SCI)
Obermeyer Place was developed in 2005 and zoned both SCI and Neighborhood
Commercial. Several of the businesses that were temporarily relocated during
construction to the Airport Business Center found they liked their alternate location better,
found it easier to access, easier to retain employees, easier for their clients, etc. Some
found that the market for their product/service was so marginal that closing shop was the
best outcome.
The spaces within Obermeyer Place zoned Neighborhood Commercial have done well.
These spaces house professional offices – Obermeyer Asset, Studio B Architects, Michael
Sailor Insurance. There are SCI spaces in Obermeyer that have had no or minimal
occupancy since the project was completed in 2005.
The two Mill Street buildings along the river (Andrews McFarlin) have enjoyed stable
occupancy. Other than the Lighting Studio these building house professional offices that
fit within the design studio moniker. The southern building is condominiumized and a few
of the units are residential, initially approved under the artist studio provision.
There are spaces in these Mill Street buildings that have not housed a traditional SCI use
in decades. The temporary location of the Jewish Community Center, for example, utilized
a space that had not contained a traditional SCI use since the mid 1970s.
Figure 4: 1975 Zone District Map.
P107
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
Review Standards:
26.310.090 Rezoning – Standards of Review.
In reviewing an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the
Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone district
and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
The request to rezone 465 and 557 North Mill Street to Mixed Use is consistent with
surrounding land uses and neighborhood characteristics. The Mixed Use Zone District is
located within the vicinity of the subject properties as shown below.
Figure 5: Map of Mixed Use Zone District (blue) and subject properties (white).
Surrounding land uses include residential (yellow is R-6 medium density residential Zone
District), commercial, retail, office, service and civic uses. The following graphic shows
the following properties and uses:
a. The Mill Building. Mixed Use Zone District. Three story building with office use, free
market residential use, lodging use and affordable housing use. Currently houses: Aspen
Building and Engineering Departments, affordable housing residents, free market
residents.
P108
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
b. North Mill Station. Neighborhood Commercial Zone District with Planned
Development Overlay. Two story building with retail use, office use, and deed restricted
affordable housing use. Currently houses: Clarks Market, Bangkok Happy Bowl, Real
Estate Offices, residents, etc.
c. 414 North Mill Street (Andrews-McFarlin Subdivision). Service, Commercial, Industrial
Zone District. Two story building with commercial and office uses. Currently houses: The
Lighting Studio, graphic design office, architecture office, etc.
d. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Public Zone District with Planned
Development Overlay. Mix of ACSD office and large garages for operations, and
residential use.
e. United States Post Office. Service, Commercial, Industrial Zone District with Planned
Development Overlay. One story building housing Aspen Post Office.
f. 410-412 North Mill Street (Andrews-McFarlin Subdivision). Service, Commercial,
Industrial Zone District. Two story building with office uses. Currently houses: land
planning office, architecture office, etc.
g. Aspen Center for Environmental Studies. Academic Zone District with Planned
Development Overlay. Mix of small buildings for non-profit use, and residential use.
h. Westend Neighborhood. R-6 Medium Density Residential Zone District. Primarily
single family and duplex residences.
P109
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
The proposed Mixed Use Zone District permits office, commercial, residential service,
civic, and public uses which are consistent with the existing uses in the neighborhood as
shown above. The Mixed Use Zone District is located at the top of Mill Street behind the
Hotel Jerome and behind the Pitkin County library. The Mixed Use Zone District was
recently amended to prohibit residential and commercial uses combined on one property.
Residential, commercial, and lodging uses are permitted in the Mixed Use Zone District;
however commercial and residential uses must be on separate parcels. Permitted
residential uses include single family, duplex, or multi- family residential. Free market
residential and affordable housing can be combined on one parcel or within one building.
Figure 6: Zone District Map. Black star indicates subject properties.
P110
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
Allowed commercial uses include formula retail, services uses, both general and specialty
retail uses, in addition to service and office uses.
The existing uses in 465 – 557 North Mill Street are compatible with the proposed Mixed
Use Zone District.
A comparison of Zone District dimensional requirements is shown below.
Table 1: Dimensional comparisons for 465 and 557 North Mill Street
SCI
Requirements MU Requirements 465 N. Mill St. 557 N. Mill St.
Minimum lot
size
3,000 sf 3,000 sf 46,535 sf
(43,544 sf with slope
reduction)
6,301 sf
(no slope reduction)
Net lot area
per dwelling
unit
No
requirement
4,500 sf single
family/duplex
4,500 sf single
family/duplex
4,500 sf single
family/duplex
Front yard
setback
No
requirement
5 - 10 ft. 31.7 ft. 11.2 ft.
Rear yard
setback
No
requirement
5 ft. Greater than 5 ft. 0 ft.
Side yard
setback
No
requirement
5 ft. 18.4 ft. east
3.7 ft. west
4.6 ft. north
11.4 ft. south
Maximum
height
35 ft. 25 ft. single
family/duplex
28 ft. all other uses
Less than 28 ft. Less than 28 ft.
FAR
2.25:1 MAX 80% of allowable in R6
– single family/duplex
1:1 to 1.5:1 MAX all
other uses
Less than 1:1 5,081 sf
About 0.81:1
Maximum
multi-family
residential
unit size
2,000 sf net
livable
2,000 sf net livable n/a n/a
Both properties have a few non-conforming setbacks. The applicant proposes to meet
required Mixed Use Zone District setbacks within 30 days of adoption of an ordinance to
rezone the properties by demolishing the non-conforming portions of the buildings.
P111
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
B. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed
amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not
limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage,
schools and emergency medical facilities.
The proposed amendment to rezone from SCI to MU would not result in additional
demands on public facilities. Both 465 and 557 North Mill Street are already developed.
The proposed amendment does not include a redevelopment for these properties. Any
redevelopment would be required to meet the Aspen Municipal Code in place at the time
of land use application or building permit application.
C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment.
The dimensional requirements in the proposed MU Zone District are significantly less than
the dimensional requirements in the existing SCI Zone District, which will positively impact
the natural environment with smaller development and defined setbacks. Adopted stream
margin review requirements which protect this Environmentally Sensitive Area are not
changed with the proposed rezoning.
The proposed uses are similar to the allowed uses in the SCI Zone District with a few key
distinctions. The SCI Zone District encourages “light industrial, manufacturing, production,
repair and similar service-related uses.” The proposed MU zone district encourages “a
mix of commercial and residential uses and smaller-scale development.” These less
intense uses will positively impact the natural environment with less noise and traffic.
D. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City and in harmony with the public interest and the
intent of this Title.
A rezone to Mixed Use is consistent with community character in the City that encourages
transitional zones between more intense commercial areas and less intense residential
areas. The proposed Mixed Use Zone will enable 465 and 557 North Mill Street to honor
this transition into the surrounding residential, public and academic uses. Promoting a
smoother transition between commercial and residential uses, and between City and
County boundaries located within the vicinity of Red Mountain Road, is consistent with
2012 Aspen Area Community Plan Policy III.3: Ensure City and County codes are
consistent in the vicinity of City/County boundaries to prevent shifts in the character of
neighborhoods, and encourage smother cross-boundary transitions regarding house size
and density.
In addition, the rezone to Mixed Use better respects the natural environment through less
intense uses than currently allowed in the Service Commercial Industrial Zone District.
The 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan adopted the philosophy that “as stewards of our
P112
VI.B.
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
environment and resources, it is our responsibility to balance human activity and the health
of our natural environment. This ethic is our defining characteristic.” Reducing noise and
environmental impacts from light industrial, manufacturing, and repairs adjacent to riparian
wetlands and the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies is aligned with adopted
community philosophy toward the environment.
The Mixed Use Zone District lowers the allowed height for these parcel by 7 to 10 feet
which is aligned with 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan Policy I.6: Establish lower
maximum building heights to maintain Aspen’s small town character. Lower height, floor
area, and increased setbacks is in harmony with Aspen’s small town character.
The proposal to rezone 465 and 557 N. Mill Street from SCI to Mixed Use meets the
requirements of the Aspen Land Use Code as addressed above. Feel free to contact us
with any questions or additional information you may need to process this request.
Sincerely,
Sara Adams, AICP
BendonAdams LLC
sara@bendonadams.com
970-925-2855
Exhibits:
1 – Land Use Application Form
2 – Agreement to Pay
3 – Authorization to Represent
4 – Proof of Ownership
5 – HOA form
6 – Pre-application Summary
7 – Survey
8 – Existing conditions for 465 and 557 N. Mill
P113
VI.B.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
March, 2016 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5050
ATTACHMENT 2 – LAND USE APPLICATION
PROJECT:
Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Location:_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)
APPLICANT:
Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone #:
REPRESENTIVATIVE:
Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________
Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone#:
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Please check all that apply):
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
PROPOSAL: (Description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ ______________
Pre-Application Conference Summary
Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement
Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form
Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements – including Written Responses to Review Standards
3-D Model for large project
All plans that are larger than 8.5” X 11” must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be
submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference
summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model.
GMQS Exemption Conceptual PUD Temporary Use
GMQS Allotment Final PUD (& PUD Amendment)
Special Review Subdivision
Conceptual SPA
ESA – 8040 Greenline, Stream Subdivision Exemption (includes
Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Condominiumization)
Mountain View Plane Final SPA (&SPA
Commercial Design Review Lot Split Amendment)
Residential Design Variance Lot Line Adjustment Small Lodge Conversion/
Expansion
Conditional Use Other:
465 and 557 North Mill Street
465 and 557 North Mill Street
2737-073-000-48 and 2737-073-000-13
North Mill Street LLC
2001 N. Halsted #304; Chicago, IL 60614
970-925-2855
BendonAdams LLC
300 So. Spring St., #202, Aspen CO 81611
970-925-2855
REZONE
Commercial and service uses exist on both properties. Currently zoned Service, Commercial, Industrial.
Proposal to rezone property from Service, Commercial, Industrial Zone District to Mixed Use Zone District.
7800
Exhibit 1
P114
VI.B.
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
March, 2016 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5050
ATTACHMENT 3
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM
Project: ______________________________________________________________________________
Applicant:
______________________________________________________________________________
Location: ______________________________________________________________________________
Zone District: ______________________________________________________________________________
Lot Size: _______________________________________________________________________________
Lot Area: _______________________________________________________________________________
(For the purpose of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high-water
mark, easement, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal
Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _________________________________
Number of residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _________________________________
Number of bedrooms: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _________________________________
Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): ______________
DIMENSIONS:
Floor Area: Existing: _____________ Allowable: ___________Proposed ____________
Principal bldg. height: Existing: _____________ Allowable: ___________Proposed____________
Access. Bldg. height: Existing: _____________ Allowable: __________ Proposed_____________
On-Site parking: Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed_____________
% Site coverage: Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed_____________
% Open Space: Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed_____________
Front Setback: Existing: _____________ Required ____________Proposed _____________
Rear Setback: Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed _____________
Combined F/F: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________
Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed _____________
Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________
Combined Sides: Existing: _____________ Required ___________ Proposed _____________
Distance between Bldgs. Existing: _____________ Required: ___________ Proposed _____________
Existing: _____________ Required: ___________Proposed: _____________
Existing non-conformities or encroachments: __________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested: _____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
465 and 557 N. Mill Street Rezone to Mixed Use
North Mill Street LLC
465 and 557 N. Mill Street
SCI
46,535 sf - 465 N. Mill Street AND 6,301 SF - 557 N. Mill Street
43,544 sf with slope reduction - 465 N. Mill Street AND 6,301 SF - 557 N. Mill Street
20,645 sf - 465 N. Mill
7,990 sf - 557 N. Mill no change
n/a
n/a
PLEASE REFER TO TABLE 1 IN APPLICATION FOR DIMENSIONS
setbacks, floor area
P115
VI.B.
Exhibit 2P116VI.B.
Exhibit 3P117VI.B.
Exhibit 4
P118
VI.B.
P119
VI.B.
P120
VI.B.
P121
VI.B.
Exhibit 5P122VI.B.
ASLU
465 &557 N. Mill St.
Rezoning
Parcel ID Nos. 273707300048 & 273707300013
1
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER: Jennifer Phelan DATE: 5/12/17
PROJECT: 465 & 557 N. Mill Street REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams
DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located within the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone
district. The owner is interested in rezoning the property to Mixed Use (MU).
Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience:
Land Use App:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/businessnav/ApprovaltoDevelop/Land%20Use%20Appl
ication%20Form.pdf
Land Use Code:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26-
Land-Use-Code/
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.310 Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map (Rezoning)
26.310.060 Rezoning – Procedure for amendment
26.310.080 Rezoning – Application Contents
26.310.090 Rezoning – Standards of Review
26.710.160 Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I)
26.710.180 Mixed-Use (MU)
Review by: Staff for completeness
P&Z and City Council
Public Hearing: Planning & Zoning, City Council
Planning Fees: $7,800.00 deposit for 24 hours of staff time (additional planning hours are billed at a
rate of $325/hour).
Total Deposit: $7,800.00
Please submit the completed application to the Community Development Office on the Third
Floor of City Hall:
Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement.
Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).
Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to
occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance
company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the
Exhibit 6
P123
VI.B.
2
State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages,
judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and
demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.
Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that
states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on
behalf of the applicant.
A site improvement survey certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state,
showing the current status of the parcel including the current topography and vegetation.
(This requirement or any part thereof may be waived by the Community Development
Director if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.)
HOA Compliance form (Attached)
A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form
of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the
development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.
An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
1 Complete Copy of all application materials. If the copy is deemed complete by staff,
the following items will then need to be submitted:
Total deposit for review of the application.
a digital copy of all application materials provided in pdf file format.
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is
based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations
that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right.
P124
VI.B.
C:\General CADD 12\Gxd\4014CF.gxd -- 06/12/2017 -- 10:37 AM -- Scale 1 : 240.000000
Exhibit 7
P125VI.B.
465 Upper LevelExhibit 8P126VI.B.
465 Lower LevelP127VI.B.
557 Upper LevelP128VI.B.
557 Lower LevelP129VI.B.
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
ASPEN, CO557 N. MILL STREETMTE
1704
ISSUE
PROJECT No:
DRAWN BY:
DRAWING SET
COPYRIGHT 2017 ALIUS DESIGN
CORPS LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
PROJECT
INFORMATION
1.2
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
07/08/2017FAR SUMMARY
1. The Contract Documents include: (1) general notes; (2) architectural, mechanical, and structural drawings. All additional specifications, details, drawings,
clarifications, or changes shall automatically become part of the Contract Documents. Any discrepancy between any components of any of the drawings shall
be reported to the Architect immediately for clarification.
2. Alius Design Corps, LLC, shall not be liable in any way for problems which arise from failure, by any third party or any party to this Contract, to follow the
design plans. The Contractor shall obtain and/or request guidance of Alius Design Corp., with respect to any errors, omissions, inconsistencies, or conflicts or
unclear information which may be discovered or alleged.
3. The Plans and Specifications are the intellectual and other property of the Architect and shall not beused without the permission of same.
4. All work shall comply with all state and local codes, ordinances, rules, regulations and laws of building officials or authorities having jurisdiction. All work shall
be performed to the highest standards or craftsmanship by all tradesman. Alius Design Corps, LLC., shall not be responsible for overseeing third party work,
nor shall Alius Design Corps, LLC., be liable for any errors or omissions of third parties who perform work on the Project.
5. The Contract Documents represent the finished structure. They do not indicate the method of construction. The Contractor shall provide all measures
necessary to protect the structure during construction. Observation visits to the site by the Structural Engineer or Architect shall not include inspection of the
____________, nor will the architect or structural engineer be responsible for the contractor's means, methods, techniques, sequences for procedure of
construction, or the safety precautions and the techniques, sequences for procedure of construction, or any safety precautions. The Contractor and not the
Architect shall be responsible for all Federal and OSHA regulations.
6. THE DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE SCALED. Written dimensions must be used. In the event of a discrepancy in dimensions, the Architect should be timely
notified for clarification. All dimensions on the drawings shall be verified against the existing conditions. All dimensions are to rough framing or face of
concrete unless noted otherwise.
7. The Construction Documents are intended to include all labor, materials, equipment, and services required to complete all work described herein. It is the
responsibility of the Contractor to bring to the attention of the Architect any conditions which will not permit construction according to these Construction
Documents.
8. The Building Inspector shall be notified by the Contractor if there is need of an inspection as required by the I.R.C., or by any local code or ordinance.
9. LOT STAKED: The Contractor shall arrange for the building to be located and staked after demolition or site clearing, to be approved by the Architect. The
Contractor shall review the lot staking and verify, to the best of his ability, its accuracy. The Contractor shall also check the grade where it meets the building
to evaluate the consistency with the drawings during excavation. All work to be done by a certified surveyor.
10. RECORD DRAWINGS: Contractor shall maintain a complete set of blue/black-line prints of contract drawings and shop drawings for record mark-up purposes
throughout the Contract time. Mark-up drawings during course of the work shall show changes and actual installation conditions, sufficient to form a complete
record for Owner's purposes.
11. SOILS AND CONCRETE: The General Contractor shall arrange for a visual site inspection at the completion of excavation by a soils engineer, and the
required concrete testing prior to any foundation work.
12. Property lines, utilities and topography shown is representative of information taken from a survey. Contractor shall notify Architect of any discrepancy or
variation between the Drawings and actual site conditions.
ABREVIATIONS
A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR
ADJ. ADJUSTABLE
ALT. ALTERNATE
A.B. ANCHOR BOLTS
& AND
ARCH. ARCHITECTURAL
@ AT
BM. BEAM
BM. PKT. BEAM POCKET
BRG. BEARING
BLK’G. BLOCKING
BOT. BOTTOM
BLDG. BUILDING
B.O. BY OWNER
CLG. CEILING
CL. CENTER LINE
CLR. CLEAR
COL. COLUMN
CONC. CONCRETE
CONN. CONNECTION
CONT. CONTINUOUS
DTL. DETAILS
DWL. DOWEL
E.W. EACH WAY
ELEV. ELEVATION
EXISTG EXISTING
EXT. EXTERIOR
FLR. FLOOR
FTG. FOOTING
FND. FOUNDATION
GA. GAUGE
G.L. GLU-LAM
G.W.B. GYPSUM WALL BOARD
HORIZ. HORIZONTAL
INFO. INFORMATION
INSUL. INSULATION
JST. JOIST
N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT
O.C. ON CENTER
OPP. OPPOSITE
PERF. PERFORATED
PL. PLATE
PLY. PLYWOOD
PROP. LINE PROPERTY LINE
REINF. REINFORCEMENT
REQ. REQUIRED
REV. REVISED
SIM. SIMILAR
S.F. SQUARE FEET
STD. STANDARD
THK. THICK
T.P. TOP OF PLATE
T.L. TOP OF LEDGE
T.W. TOP OF WALL
TOT. TOTAL
TYP. TYPICAL
U.N.O. UNLESS NOTED UTHERWISE
V.I.F. VERIFY IN FIELD
033
LBB
PROJECT INFORMATION
PARCEL ID ............................................................................................................................................................................. 273707300013
LOT SIZE ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 6,301 sq.ft.
ZONING .................................................................................................................................................................................................... CSI
USE .............................................................................................................................................................................................UNKNOWN
CONSTRUCTION TYPE ..............................................................................................................................................................UNKNOWN
GENERAL RENOVATION NOTES
1.0 All existing conditions must be verified by the contractor in the field. Unknown and varied conditions may be found. Notify the structural engineer and/or architect of any
structural or architectural conditions found to vary from that indicated from the drawings. Design revisions may be required, and are to be expected as a process of remodel
work.
2.0 All new work, details, surfaces, or finishes shall match adjacent existing surfaces unless noted or directed otherwise by the owner or interior designer. Contractor to verify with
architect any conflict between existing and new conditions.
3.0 All electrical modifications and/or additions to be as directed by owner/lighting designer during construction. Contractor/lighting designer to verify electrical capacity and review
new designs or alterations with architect, prior to implementation.
4.0 All interior electrical fixtures, plumbing fixtures and trim, cabinet design, and other finishes to be at the directive of the owner or interior designer unless noted otherwise in the
drawings. Contractor to provide all necessary prep work for installation of any materials as required.
5.0 Structural engineering – if any modifications to the existing structural system are deemed necessary beyond these shown in the drawings, all existing conditions are to be verified
in the field by a registered structural engineer before proceeding. The architect will not be responsible for any structural modifications not verified or approved by a structural
engineer.
6.0 Contractor will verify and coordinate all openings through floors, ceilings, and walls with all architectural, structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical design and
construction.
ARCHITECTURAL
1.1 PROJECT INFORMATION
1.2 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS
3.1 LOWER LEVEL PLAN
3.2 MAIN LEVEL PLAN
4.1 NORTH AND EAST ELEVATIONS
4.2 SOUTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS
5.1A
557 MILL STREET
REFERENCE GRID LINE
SPOT ELEVATION
WINDOW MARK
DOOR MARK
ROOM NUMBER
DRAWING REVISION
ASSEMBLY DETAIL CUT
SECTION CUT
EXTERIOR ELEVATION
DETAIL CALLOUT
INTERIOR ELEVATION
ROOM
100
F11
1
T. O. RIDGE
BEAM
123'-6 1/2"
4.4
1
1
7.1
8.1
1
2
3
4
SYMBOL & MATERIAL LEGEND
PROJECT INFORMATION
DRAWING INDEX
PROJECT DIRECTORY
CONSTRUCTION NOTES
ABBREVIATIONS
FLOOR AREA SUMMARY 07.08.2017GENERAL NOTES
VICINITY MAP
8
P130VI.B.
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
ASPEN, CO557 N. MILL STREETMTE
1704
ISSUE
PROJECT No:
DRAWN BY:
DRAWING SET
COPYRIGHT 2017 ALIUS DESIGN
CORPS LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS
1.3
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
07/08/2017FAR SUMMARY
428 sq ft
711 sq ft
428 sq ft
335 sq ft
137 sq ft
93 sq ft
291 sq ft
78'-8"
78'-8"47'-4"47'-4"
78'-8"
47'-4"
WALL #001
WALL #002
WALL #003
WALL #004
WALL #001
WALL #002
WALL #003
WALL #004
3,893 sq ft
711 sq ft
401 sq ft
311 sq ft
3,893 sq ft
Main Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft)3893
Main Level Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft)3893.00
Front Porch Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft)0.00
Deck Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft)0.00
Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft)0.00
Total Exisiting Floor Area Calcuations
Subgrade Floor Area (Sq Ft)1187.72
Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft)3893.00
Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft)0.00
Total Exisiting Floor Area (Sq Ft)5,080.72
Floor Area Calculations
557 N. MILL STREET
Existing Main Level Floor Area Calculations
Existing Deck/Porch Floor Area Calculations
Lower Level Wall Label Total Wall Area (Sq Ft)Exposed Wall Area (Sq Ft)
1 711.00 311.00
2 428.00 93.00
3 711.00 0.00
4 428.00 291.00
Overall Total Wall Areas (Sq Ft)2,278.00
Exposed Wall Area (Sq Ft)695
% of Exosed Wall (Exposed / Total)30.51%
Lower Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft)3893.00
Lower Leve Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft)1187.72 (3893*30.51%)
Subgrade Floor Area (Sq Ft)1187.72
Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft)3893.00
Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft)0.00 N/A
Total Existing Floor Area (Sq Ft)5,080.72
Total Existing Floor Area Calculations
Floor Area Calculations
557 N. MILL STREET
Existing Lower Level Wall Calculations
Existing Lower Level Floor Area Calculations
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 FIRST FLOOR AREA
P131VI.B.
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
ASPEN, CO557 N. MILL STREETMTE
1704
ISSUE
PROJECT No:
DRAWN BY:
DRAWING SET
COPYRIGHT 2017 ALIUS DESIGN
CORPS LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
LOWER LEVEL PLAN
3.1
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
07/08/2017FAR SUMMARY
A A
B B
2
2
1
1
80'-0"48'-8"INTERIOR DEMISING WALLS
NOT DOCUMENTED
A5.1
A5.1
D5.1D5.1
24.1
14.1
24.2
0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL PLANP132 VI.B.
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
ASPEN, CO557 N. MILL STREETMTE
1704
ISSUE
PROJECT No:
DRAWN BY:
DRAWING SET
COPYRIGHT 2017 ALIUS DESIGN
CORPS LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
MAIN LEVEL PLAN
3.2
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
07/08/2017FAR SUMMARY
A A
B B
2
2
1
1
80'-0"48'-8"48'-8"80'-0"
A5.1
A5.1
D5.1D5.1
24.1
14.1
24.2
INTERIOR DEMISING WALLS
NOT DOCUMENTED
0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL PLANP133
VI.B.
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
ASPEN, CO557 N. MILL STREETMTE
1704
ISSUE
PROJECT No:
DRAWN BY:
DRAWING SET
COPYRIGHT 2017 ALIUS DESIGN
CORPS LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NORTH & EAST
ELEVATIONS
4.1
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
07/08/2017FAR SUMMARY
B A
89'-111/2"
100'-0"
110'-0"
LINE OF EXIST. GRADE
MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY
LOWER LEVEL T.O. PLY
ROOF T.O. PLY
2 1
89'-111/2"
100'-0"
110'-0"
SHED ROOF ENCLOSURE
OVER STAIR
LINE OF EXIST. GRADE
MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY
LOWER LEVEL T.O. PLY
ROOF T.O. PLY
0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EAST ELEVATION
0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION
P134VI.B.
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
DESIGN CORPS
ALIUS
ASPEN, CO557 N. MILL STREETMTE
1704
ISSUE
PROJECT No:
DRAWN BY:
DRAWING SET
COPYRIGHT 2017 ALIUS DESIGN
CORPS LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
SOUTH & WEST
ELEVATIONS
4.2
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
07/08/2017FAR SUMMARY
A B
89'-111/2"
100'-0"
110'-0"
LINE OF EXIST. GRADE
LINE OF STAIR
BEYOND
MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY
LOWER LEVEL T.O. PLY
ROOF T.O. PLY
1 2
89'-111/2"
100'-0"
110'-0"
LINE OF EXIST. GRADE
MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY
LOWER LEVEL T.O. PLY
ROOF T.O. PLY
0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION
0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION
P135VI.B.