The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.131 Midland Ave.0070.2010.ASLU0070.2010.ASLU 131 MIDLAND AVE 2737 18 10 7007 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN VARIENCE XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 6 24\ -~ . 5/31/2/,3615*6*.cul-i zÂ·.,Â· - .. THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0070. 2010 .ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2737 18 10 7007 PROJECTS ADDRESS 131 MIDLAND AVE PLANNER CLAUDE SALTER CASE DESCRIPTION RESIDENTIAL DESIGN VARIENCE REPRESENTATIVE STUDIO B ARCHITECTS DATE OF FINAL ACTION 3.13.11 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 04.20.11 .. DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date ofthis Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and Telephone Number MHRJ3, LLC, 13 1 Midland Ave, Aspen, Colorado, 81611, (970) 429-2116 Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property â€¢ Subdivision: Riverside Addition Block: 7 Lot: 3, Subdivision: Promontory Block: 1 Lot: 7 and:- Lot: 8 less the Southerly 15 feet part of lot 7 & 8, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, Colorado â€¢ 13 1 Midland Ave, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan â€¢ Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission approved with conditions two variances from the Residential Design Standard. One for the Parking. Garages and Carports Standard and the other for the First Story Element Standard. â€¢ Approval grants the ability for new development to have an attached garage two (2) feet further back from the street than the front-most wall of the house. Approvals grant that the first story element may be a depth of four (4) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from, Per the exhibit B Revised Proposal from P&Z meeting March 8,2011. Land Use Approvaks) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) Approval with conditions by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission for two Residential Design Standard variances regarding the Parking, Garage and Carport requirement and the First Story Element Standard. Issued on March 08,2011. Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) March 20,2011 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) March 20,2014 .. Issued this day of Mayeh 8,2011, by the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission. i t 0.V. Chris Bendon, Director Community Development Tue, Mar 15,2011 ~ ~ 11:28:52 6293761 Ad Ticket #5 Acct: 1013028 Name: Aspen (LEGALS) City of Phone: (970)920-5064 Address: 130 S Galena St E-Mail: ANGELA SCOREY Client: Caller: Angela Scorey City: Aspen Receipt Zip: 81611 State: CO Ad Name: 6293761A Original Id: 0 Editions: 8ATI/8ATW/ Class: 0990 Start: 03/20/11 Stop: 03/20/11 Color: Issue 1 Copyline: 6293761 atw DO 131 Midland Ave Rep: AT Legals PVWL G NO nCE 01 DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL N Â· ar m Ng lr,nt '14?1'Â·Â·ullÂ·/ f f 0 ' I'Â·I I I 1/ ' lf*j -tto th@ u .' Â· Â· r 24 A - r, Lines: 60 ~ 13('- 1- '--SL .Aol.}i. C ... 1,1 1, T-Â·. C'Â·'-E.NG'24 " - .0- 3 TÂ·-E h - - â€¢ I FEE - F Â·,BLE A POâ€¢17 UN C r . -- - I OCK 1 PHOMO #HY SUBDIVT. Depth: 5.01 AS DO '*ENT NO. 10,3731 N 0 -- Â·Â· " S:OF. Â·V WDING TO -HE PLAT BE 7. w'DED AT PAC .40 OF THE RECOÂ·Â·CÂ· '- .'Â· '' TKN COUNTY Me" 1 'Ar 'iCL ;AL flâ€¢Â·-41,) Columns: 1 AS f-OLLOW. 'CuiNNiNG A- A POINT WHENCE THE Â· - -HWES- CORNER OF LOT 2 NA DED{-Â·Â· 4. , 53~JEEDIV S. ON GEAF,5 N y ..4 -NENC,E :75 'r 46 Discount: 0.00 49; - . ;: 'r-~.Â£.'/ - ~_ ..._~,, ~~ Â· ~' ''~~.f FE: - ~ , -- C f{NErÂ· r ;'ID AND WEe -' LINE k. Ht , r.Â· I .., '41'CEL Commission: O.00 C: A POPTIONI- $ ' Â· i PÂ·JOMCN -TCPY ..UBDIVEEb Â· â€¢ 1 -' 0 -MVISION 9 'r 16 R.Â·NORDE : Â· .. L " NT NO 10573' Â·ND 'CH BOOK ZA AT PAÂ·Â·IE -/OF THE RECE=â‚¬ â‚¬ mOR Pr< N Cor Â· -Â· 7 'RE Net: 0.00 PAF - CH I -Â·41 7 DESCRIBED AL , /WS BEil W Â· 6 A POrNT WHENuc THE NOP - - - NER OF SAID OT 8 BE. 16 Nl/4 - --27 THENG Â· 1,4 I D Tax: 0.00 FEET -1 - L '. ' NITC Â·i, . .. WHIÂ¢L, IS /1-OV ' - 0'.ul'h'. - - p....y, / Lel Â·- FEET -U '- 1 1 1 ..ID LOT- g ,~ . . - :~ _ v - m ' - . Total 30.36 NLi, v. - - LOCK 7.-1~Â·'~ ~ FF~-7 .1 - 11- 1--- -OR -Â·-' - 7 -- 573 96'E 0,/ .' '. .:i ugs Payment O.00 1 '. l Am 1 -- I. 4 1 , dy Â¢1 1 (N' al C.â€¢, iA,-- , -0 b cialeft bl Aspe, . u. :,gy> 4 .* 029 v =N S.: Citv ":dA<Â·{In Punsh:?d n trw: Ast}an Times Week:y on Man . 23,2011 I(2927<411 Ad shown is not actual print size Ad ID ~6293761 Date |03/15/2011 Time~11:28 AM { PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: PARCEL A: LOT 3, BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDI- TION, EXCEPTING FROM SAID LOT 3, THE SOUTHERLY 15 FEET. PARCEL B: A PORTION OF LOT 7, BLOCK 1 PROMOTORY SUBDIVI- SION, ACCORDING TOTHE PLAT RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A AT PAGE 240 OF THE RECORDS FOR PITKIN COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 8 SAID PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION BEARS N75Â°06' W 3.61 FEET: THENCE 375Â°06'E 46 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8: THENCE N17Â°45'E 40 FEET: THENCE N75Â°06'W 16 FEET; THENCE IN A SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY COURSE ON A STRAIGHT LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL C: A PORTION OF LOT 8, BLOCK 1 PROMON- TORY SUBDIVISION, WHICH SUBDIVISION PLAT IS RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A AT PAGE 240 OF THE RECORDS FOR PITKIN COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8 BEARS Nl 7Â°45' E 20.92 FEET; THENCE Nl 7Â°45' E 20.92 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8, WHICH IS ALSOTHE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7, SAID BLOCK 1: THENCE N75Â°06'W 49.61 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE 624Â°06'W TO A POINT 15 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHEAST COR- NER OF LOT 3; BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDI- TION: THENCE 675Â°06'E TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 8: THENCE N24Â°37'E TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, and more commonly known as 131 Midland Ave., Aspen, Colorado, 81611, by order of the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 08, 2011. The Applicant received approval with conditions for two Residential Design Standard variances allowing for the development of a single family residence with an attached garage. For further information contact Claude Salter, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. s/ C ity o f Aspe n Published in the Aspen Times Week/y on March 20,2011. [6293761] Ad shown is not actual print size ~12@410 NQDGE 01 DEVELOPUENT APPROVAL 1 Notice is hereby given to the general public 01 the 7 approval 01 a site spectric development plan, and [ 1 the Creation of a vested property right pursuant to ~ 1 the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 1 24, Article 68. C.2lorado Revised Statutes. ~' I pertaining to the folluNIng described propervÂ· J 1 PARCEL A. LOT 3, BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDI- |l TION, EXCEPTING FROM SAID LOT 3, THE ~ 1 1 SOUTHERLY 15 FEET. PARCEL B. A PORTION I 1 OF LOT 7, BLOCK 1 PROMOTORY SUBDIVI- 11 I SION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED 1 I 1 AS DOCUMENT NO. 105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A 1 1 I AT PAGE 240 OF THE RECORDS FOR PlTKIN 1 [ 1 COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED 1 1 1 AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT I 1 WHENCE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 8 1 1 SAID PAOMONTORY SUBDIVISION BEARS 1 N75Â°06' W 3.61 FEET; THENCE S75Â°06'E 46 1 1 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID f * LOT 8: THENCE N17Â°45'E 40 FEET: THENCE I N75Â°06'W 16 FEET: THENCE IN A SOUTHERLY I 1 AND WESTERLY COURSE ON A STRAiGHT 1 1 LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINN*NG. PARCEL f 1 C: A PORTION OF LOT 8, BLOCK 1 PROMON- 1 TORY SUBDIVISION, WHICH SUBDIVISION PLAT IS RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 1 105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A AT PAGE 240 OF ~ THE RECORDS FOR PITKIN COUNTY, MORE i PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8 BEARS N17Â°45' E 20.92 FEET: THENCE N17Â°45' E 20.92 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8, WHICH IS ALSO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7. SAID BLOCK 1: THENCE N75Â°06'W 49.61 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE S24Â°06' W TO A POINT 15 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHEAST COR- NER OF LOT 3: BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDI NON: THENCE S75Â°06'E TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS; THENCE N24Â°37'E TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, and mote commonly known as 131 Midland Ave., Aspen. Colorado, 81611, by order of the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 08,2011, The Applicant received approval i with conditions for two Residential Design Standard variances allowing for the development of a single family residence with an attached garage. For further information contact Claude Salter. at the ; City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Gatena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. s/City Of Aspen Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on March 20,2011. [6293761] public auction. at 10:00 A M. on Wednesday I 1 05/18/2011, at Pitkin Cour* Courthouse. at the | 1 south front door. 506 E Main St, Aspen. Colorado, 1 sell to the highest and best bidder for cash. the I said real property and all interest ot the said $ Grantorish Grantor(S)' heirs and assigns therein, I for the purpose of paying the indebtedness I provided in said Evidence of *bt secured by the t Deed of Trust. plus attorneys' fees, the expenses of sale and other items allowed by law, acid will issue to the purchaser a Certificate of Purchase, all as provided by law. First Publication: 3/20/2011 Last Publication: 4/172011 Name of PublicationÂ· The Aspen Times WeeR/y DATE 01/18/2011 Thomas Carl Oken, Public Trustee in and for the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado By: Tiffany Wancura, Chief Deputy Public Trustee The name A.H.... lal.-1.-â€ž- _.._a- unday, March 20, 2011 â€¢ Aspen Tii IMPROVEMENTS, IF ANY, SITUATE, LYING AND BEING IN THE COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: LOT 24 COUNTRY CLUB UNIT ONE Also known by street and number asÂ· 208 FAIRWAY DRIVE, 1 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ~ NOTICE OF SALE The current holder of the Evidence of Debt ~ secured by the Deed of Trust, described herein, has filed Notice of Election and Demand for sale as provided by law and in said Deed of Trust. THEREFORE, Notice Is Hereby Given that I will at public auction, at 10:00 A.M. on Wednesday, 04/27/2011, at Pitkin County Courthouse. at the I south front door, 506 E Main St, Aspen, Colorado, I sell to the highest and best bidder for cash, the 1 said real property and all interest of the said Grantor(s). Grantor(sr heirs and assigns therein, for the purpose of paying the indebtedness i provided in said Evidence of Debt secured by the I naa rd Trl,qt nlug attomp.vs' fees the exoerses r' 1 tiolu . 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306 ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ~l , Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, AAG~-4,~6 60U\Q-~'-1 (name, please print) being or rebresenting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section 26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code iii the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official Paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 22-day of Mo--ro~ , 2011, by 471=7*6*~.4- Sc IL~_~_ WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My~ommission expires: ~-21 -20 L d Â»-14*1 *44(1 -Notary Public 1 #*44 ATTACHMENTS: I .M COPY OF THE PUBLICATION -:, j j .~-Â· NNING i OF CO- My Commission Expires 03/29/2014 .. Resolution No. 6 - (SERIES OF 2011) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ATTACHED GARAGE AT 131 MIDLAND AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 273718107007 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from MHRJ3, LLC (Jennifer and Brian Hermelin), requesting Variance approval from certain Residential Design Standards for the construction of a single-family residence and attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department Staff reviewed the application for compliance with the Variance Review Standards; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval with conditions and denial of the Variances from two Residential Design Standards - Parking, garages and carports (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 C.2.) and First story element (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 D.2.); and, WHEREAS, the 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; March 01, 2011; and WHEREAS, The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission continued the public hearing, requesting applicant attempt to further meet the Standard; and WHEREAS, On March 08, 2011 at a continued public hearing, 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, (unchanged from the first recommendation) and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission approves with conditions, the noted Varianee requests to construct a single-family residence at 131 Midland Avenue, by a vote of _three_to _two_(_3_ - _2_),and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. RECEPTION#: 578388, 03/16/2011 at 03:39:09 PM, 1 OF 4, R $26.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO 0 0 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves variances from the following two Residential Design Standards: â€¢ L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C.2., Parking, garages and carports (requiring the front fÂ®ade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport to be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house). The specific review standard language reads: "The front fagacle of the garage or the front most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front most wall of the house." A variance is granted to permit the garage to be setback (2) feet from the lower front faÂ©ade and three (3) feet from the upper faÂ©ade is permitted. and â€¢ L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 D.2., First story element (requiring all residential buildings to . "all have a first story street-facing element). The specific review standard language reads. residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front faQade shall not be precluded." A variance is granted to permit the depth of the first story element to be 4 feet (rather than the six (6) required) from the wall the first story element is proiecting from. The Planning and Zoning Commission has determined the variance requests meet the review criteria outlined in L.U.C. Section 26.410.020(D)(2). These approvals shall permit the Applicant to construct a single-family residence with an attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue as represented at the public hearing held March 8, 2011. Section 2: The building permit application to develop the above-mentioned residence shall include a copy of the final P&Z Resolution. All other requirements to develop a single family residence shall be submitted as part of the building permit application including but not limited to: adopted building and fire codes, relevant standards within the Aspen Municipal Code such as engineering and water system standards, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations, etcetera. .. 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 thereoÂ£ Section 5: 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 plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. APPROVED by the Commission at its meeting on March 8,2011. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Â»ZO ~<tim True, special Counsel Stan Gibbs, Chair ATTEST: 1,Ab *Uv / ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk V List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Site plan (representing approved variance from garage setback and first story element) 0 . . 6 0 HI -e> iE : 4 8750 6'0 ' 4 Â£ TE PL--Ard .. ... 0 - A 5 735 A ly &L ; 42, . 7 1 10" GARAGE IS NOW TIGHT / N DLT 1 / I &- L TO THE SIDE YARD o - i40 L 4 k* . 6 SETBACK . aut.. DLB' 2 4 \ / f Q. / A5" 7/ co GARAGE HAS BEEN A5" .7' DLT ~ // MO#ED BACK TO 3' 1 , // Pl 1 " :/ / ~ FROM THE FRONT-MOST DL7 Â¥94- // 1 1& A5' FACADE OF THE UPPER j So DL' s 1 Â· 6'00, A" LEVEL M/4â‚¬L7 20 649L D., Â£z------~ d. 4 / g ' REC.) - 1 ----- kk /O ,lI- 1 k . 1 / 4 SIDE ,),1 -~31(pr / ~ ''' ' Pl 9,1 1 / GARAGE , r DI-91 7 I 1. f 43 P8' 2/ DLB' /. \ -M. ~ 10to" , :1 '''I . I - I / / / / / N f)/ UPPER LEVEL OVERHANG r-3 , DLT 4 ~/, 1 ,,.. ,/ ONÂ¥-STORY ELEMENT IS - AN ENTRY CANOPY 1 2 \ ' / , EXTENDING 4' FROM THE 1 .A-/ :/ / / 1 .It - 1 '' UPPER LEVEL AND 18" Ar 2 i r / Ch i BEYOND THE SET-BACK .. fi j - ,' 142 AS ALLOWED BY EAVES ./ MAIN LIVING r _j h / AND ROOF EXTENSIONS 4 6 2 7- - = 11 Pl " 1 . - t! DLD 11 f f ' 2 ..3 1 \ Li /5 9- 0 - 1 4 0 1 9 40 A5" , ..6 22 SIDE YARD SETBACK HAS / \ L7' > ~ j ' ' BEEN MOVED TO 7' 1 1 1 ./'ll 9 1 C 1 1 1% 1 / / 4 6 & \ REV SE>-5 November 2010 - r REV DC>-20 Dece./.2010 b O -1>, ' . 0 11: * -9 \ 1 , 1 /2 DD--6 /k,â€žMy 2011 2 1 I E 0 2 1 114 O / --4 /0 ~ ~~ :.<~E Y~|RD SETBACK 5 Construct.n Y Rev Date: B *rch 2011 19 Issue date: 00 DATE 0000 C. Drawing T~e: it I / ' /'/75Â°06'00"11/ - _ LT Sheet# ~ 8,1 SITE PLAN -12---- 012- /.46,51 A.' / -0-0.ifiL-99<4Â»f 1.*pr DL6' PROPOSED GARAGE SETBACK /\ 9 /11 AND ONE STORY ELEMENT Al.1 r--- v Â»a SCALE :NTS SHADOW MTN 41, 7--1. . . 66.16' 2-- L_ - i A / 30N3aISEIhl NI13I/\Ihl3H 3AN3~VOCON~N7~1~~MLE L 03A~393a SIHDIa m 013h[3,IL 1,Â·if~,UmM'm/ Â·WDIa Bmg3/ BH1011/ INÂ¥ ....ls MÂ¥1 NOWWOO TIV N[vl3/ TIVHS 'yd Slon,HOUY 9 OICALS '0'd Sloal*Ho~V S olonts jo NOISSIINW3/ N31.1.IWA ~Olud 31+1 inOH'IM 03ld()0 1~0 036A 39 Av~ NOUVINWO jNI SIH. 30 18'~d ON '3'd S O31Â¢HDHV 9 0,/US 30 Alk.,K}kld I,11 SI 1N31'Inooo SIHI NO 03NIVINDO 1 131NI NOIS30 ONV NOI LVIÂ·,80 JN, 3+ LL '0+d S1031114 0~v e Olonls 100~ Â® . City Planning & Zoning Meeting- Minutes - March 08, 2011 Comments 2 Minutes 2 Conflicts of Interest 2 131 Midland Ave - Residential Design Standard Variance 2 625 E Main St -(Stage 3) PUD 6 1 .. City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 08, 2011 Stan Gibbs called the special Planning & Zoning meeting March 08,2011 to order in 4:35 in Council Chambers meeting Room. P&Z Commissioners in attendance were Jim DeFrancia, LJ Erspamer, Cliff Weiss, Berl Myrin, and Stan Gibbs. P&Z members not in attendance were Jasmine Tygre and Michael Wampler. Staff in attendance Jim True, Special City Counsel; Claude Salter, Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Bert Myrin said thank you we have scheduled the 29th and his goal was to look at the goal and figure out what matches with the communities values. Jim DeFrancia said it would be in the Sister Cities Meeting Room. Cliff Weiss said that when we started this Bert started keeping track of some of these and asked Bert to send out a list of what is going to be up for discussion. Minutes Tabled to the next meeting. Stan Gibbs said it was helpful to get the portion on the Midland Avenue March 1St hearing. Declarations of Conflicts of Interest Erspamer recused himself on Stage 3 because he has a listing agreement with the property across the alley. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 131 Midland Ave. - Residential Design Standards Stan Gibbs opened the continued public hearing on 131 Midland Ave, residential design standard variance. Claude Salter said she will review some of the things from last time and said sitting next to her were Scott Lindenau and Joseph Spears from Studio B Architects representing the owners who would like to demolish a single family residence and rebuild it. Claude Salter said that they were requesting 2 residential design standard variances that are the parking garage and carport standard; that standard requires that a garage be setback from the house 10 feet. Salter stated the other standard was a variance from the first story element, which requires a residence to have a single story element without living space above it. The standards were created to preserve and establish neighborhood scale and character in general and ensure that Aspen streetscapes are conducive to walking. And to require that each home have a characteristic which contribute to the streetscape and more specifically the parking garage standard is a li feless part of the streetscape and the first story 2 .. City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 08,2011 element is to provide a human scale to the fa~ade ofthe house to create a welcoming environment between the street and the house. Salter reviewed the criteria by which a variance is granted (a) provide an appropriate design or pattern o f development considering the neighborhood, considering the development with adjacent structures and the neighborhood to determine if an exemption is warranted; (b) a variance is clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Salter said the Commission requested staff find out the dates of 18 residences used as examples to use as neighborhood context and when the residential design standards came into effect. Ordinance #30 series o f 1995 was the first story element and garage setback were adopted; all residential buildings must have a 1 story street facing element the width which comprises at least 20% of the length of the width. The other one is all portions of a garage, carport or storage area shall be parallel to the street shall be recessed from the front faGade a minimum of 10 feet. Salter said that of the 18 examples provided 9 were built prior to the adoption of the standards, 1 was built after the adoption but received a residential design variance and 7 were built after the adoption of the residential design standards and some of them actually do have the 1 story element. Salter said that the applicant has amended the design of their project with a redesigned garage entry setback 2 feet from the front faGade and 3 feet from the second story level. The redesigned entry has a 1St story element which is a canopy extending 4 feet from the upper level and 18 inches into the setback as allowed by code. Staff recommends the parking garage variance be approved because the applicant has attempted to meet the setback standard. Staff finds the 1St story element does not meet the intent or the requirements of the standard and also the project is new construction on a lot which does not have site specific constraints and staff recommends that Planning & Zoning deny the 1 st story variance request. LJ Erspamer asked what would staff approve on the first story element. Jennifer Phelan replied what met the standard with no living space above it and the minimum; they made an attempt. Cliff Weiss said going back to the 18 homes and 7 were built after the adoption in 1995 and you say several met the first story elements so the others that did not, did they get variances away from 1 st story. Phelan said that the building files show there were 1St story elements but it has not been verified that it is the right size. Weiss said there was an attempt to comply with the code. Weiss asked why in one 3 City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 08, 2011 area their attempt to meet the code you recommend approval and the other their attempt to find compromise with the code does not meet staff approval. Phelan replied that the entire staff recognized that it is a bit of an oddly shaped lot and yes you don't need to have a garage; they could also place the garage in a different location which would potentially affect the level of the design of the building and we felt that some extent of it there could be a front entry and it is a brand new house and a porch is a pretty typical feature of a building. Weiss said the distance of what you are looking for and what they have done is 2 feet, pretty minimal. Phelan said to get some recess from the faqade. Jim DeFrancia said from the examples that one was built after the adoption of the residential design standards and got a variance; what was the variance. Phelan replied it was for building orientation; so she guessed the street might have been curvilinear. Salter said that they may have met it at the time and the code has changed since the 1995 adoption but it doesn't mean that they meet the code by today's standards. Joseph Spears stated that they did their own research from 5 or so years and the majority ofthese are doing what we wish to do and a couple within a half a block from this property and were built within the last 2 to 3 years before any changes were made. Spears said that LIPC offers variances for the same standards or they could have been a lot split which they were not made to do the design standards. Scott Lindenau said that they have moved the garage as far back as they could without compromising an average size car. Lindenau showed a drawing with the trees and the porch is proposed at 10 feet wide and 5 feet deep and is much larger than the majority of those. Lindenau said the model shows the entryway. Spears said they pushed the garage back as far as they could to make the site functional. LJ Erspamer said that last time they were talking about the slope in the back of the garage and didn't want to encroach in the back because you didn't have any way to support that garage to the rear. Lindenau said that was to push the garage on the other side. The hand out was Exhibit C with photographs. DeFrancia asked staff i f they were approving the garage setback at a minimum of 3 feet maintained from the upper level faqade ofthe house. Phelan replied the front fagde projects further towards the front property line; so as long as the garage is 3 feet from the second level which project further than the first level so it projects 2 feet from the first level. 4 City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 08,2011 Bert Myrin asked i f the back o f the garage moved back or did the garage get smaller. Spears replied the back of the garage moved back as well; the garage is smaller than standard by 6 inches. Weiss asked if this was presented to staff. Spears replied that it was just put together yesterday and today. No public comment. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution it006-11 approving 2 variance requests for the residential design standards to construct a single family residence at 131 Midland Avenue. Clif Weiss seconded. Roll call vote: Myrin, no; Erspamer, no; Weiss, yes: DeFrancia, yes ; Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 3-2. Commission Comments prior to the roll call of the motion: DeFrancia reaffirmed that the intent is met with the setback as opposed to the protrusion ofthe porch; this is an unusual shaped lot and it is commensurate with the neighborhood it doesn't seem out ofcontext. Weiss commented that this say ever since 1994 and before that there has been a hodgepodge, we are not breaking a precedent here and we are not setting one either. Weiss said that they were showing intent and trying and ifthey could have put another 2 feet on that canopy they would have done it but another code got in their way. Weiss said it wasn't a tremendous variance from anything that has been done. Erspamer.asked Jennifer if this met the depth except they didn't do the other 2 feet. Phelan responded yes essentially it has the width requirement; this could be designed differently. Weiss said they were the designers and we were not. Myrin asked why we were taking space from the front where you could achieve a building inset door or inset space and giving it to the back of the house basically rather than shifting what could be the house back into the space that is there. Bert Myrin recommended an amendment to the motion to meet the code on the front door setback building element; LJ Erspamer seconded. Jim DeFrancia did not accept that amendment; there was a motion on the table and if that motion fails then Bert's motion could be considered. Gibbs said he was very much against variances unless there was good reason for it and certainly all the pictures don't influence his judgment in this because it is a case by case basis; we don't want to perpetuate that it has been done a lot. Gibbs said that he thought the site is constrained and the design we have seen, people should be able to design what they like Victorian or modern. Gibbs said in his 5 1% . .. City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 08, 2011 sense the code was overly biased against modern design; it doesn't mean that you can't do a modern design and meet the code; there were other statements made that there were site specific constraints. Gibbs said we have heard enough given thi s design; we could make them change it but what we see here and the effort they have made to comply; is this were sitting with a bunch of Victorians that would be different than the eclectic neighborhood. Gibbs said he would approve both variances. Myrin said it is too much building for the site that is here; if the building was hal f the size or without a garage a lot could be accomplished. Myrin said there was nothing that talks about the building must fill the entire site or max out the FAR or must have a garage; it would be appropriate on a larger lot. Myrin said from what the code said he didn't see what staff recommended was the denial on the front door. PUBLIC HEARING: 625 E Main St -(Stage 3) PUD Stan Gibbs opened the public hearing for 625 East Main Street, Planned Unit Development. Jessica Garrow said the building was commonly known as the Stage 3 Building and Jeff Cardot, the new owner and Adam Roy with David Johnston Architects were present. There are 6 reviews in front Planning & Zoning Commission and they are to amend the Growth Management new review for the Free-market, Affordable Housing and Mixed Use Development; recommendations to City Council on the Amendment of Subdivision, Planned Unit Development and Rezoning. Garrow said this project was approved in 2007 and is vested and being reviewed under the 2006 code. The proposal is to amend the internal make up of the building and decreased in size by about 19% and rooftop deck and green roof have been eliminated. Garrow said by eliminating the rooftop deck the full height access stairs and elevator can be removed from the roof. The garage will have 13 parking spots in the basement and 3 on the outside o f the building; the storage space in the basement is being converted to the Commercial Use of 2,118 square feet. There changes on the first floor have slightly more space; the second floor has a slight increase of office space. Instead of having 5 free-market units there are 3 two bedroom units; the density ofthe project is increasing. Staff is recommending approval o f the Growth Management requests for the net increase in commercial square footage and the amendment for the Growth Management in order to decrease the density of the project and the use mix proposed. Garrow said the applicant has requested a PUD in order to enable the net livable space in those free-market units. So in 2006 there was an emergency ordinance 6 MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Directol<~~f FROM: Claude Salter, Zoning Officer (25 RE: 131 Midland Ave - Residential Design Standards Variances, - Public Hearing MEETING DATE: March 8,2011 (Continued from March 1, 2011) SPECIAL NOTE: This staff report is new since the March 1st hearing and addresses changes to the proposal since the last hearing. It contains the following: â€¢ A summary of the issues raised from the last meeting with additional information provided by Staff and the Applicant; â€¢ Staff recommendation & motion. Also attached is the original staff report of March 1,2011. This memo provides the Commission with the variance request, and background associated with the RDS (Residential Design Standards) so the information is at hand. March 1, 2001 Meeting Summary: At the last meeting the Commission considered two Residential Design Standard Variance requests. Although the Commission liked the design of the residence they felt the applicant could make an effort to meet the required standards. The Applicant was given direction from the Commission to attempt to meet the Parking, Garage and Carport Standard and the First Story Element Standard. The Commission continued the meeting in order to give the applicant time to submit revised designs. The Commission requested Staff find date of construction of 18 residences used as examples by the applicant to illustrate neighborhood context. Commission requested the dates to better judge whether the RDS did not exist at the time of construction or if the RDS were enforced. Adoption of Residential Design Standards: Per recommendation from the adopted AACP (Aspen Area Community Plan) and a design symposium held during the same year goals were established to preserve neighborhood character. Ordinance No. 30 (Series of 1995) adopted initial design standards, the first story element and garage set back were adopted as follows: 2. Building Elements a. All residential buildings must have a one-story street facing element the width of which comprises at least 20% of the building's overall width. 3. All portions of a garage, carport of storage area parallel to the street shall be recessed behind the front fa,ade a minimum of ten (10) feet. Subsequent changes to the design standards have occurred over time including changes to the first story element standard. Of the eighteen examples provided by the applicant to demonstrate the inconsistencies in the application of the RDS throughout the neighborhood: â€¢ Nine (9) were built prior to the adoption of the standards â€¢ One (1) was built after the adoption and received a RDS variance â€¢ Seven (7) were built after the adoption of the RDS. Of the seven which were built after the adoption of the RDS and used as examples; several met the first story element standard. The Applicant has amended the design of the project and a summary of the changes are provided below. Comments from Staff follow in a separate, italicized paragraph when applicable. The Applicant' s representative has provided the changes in the attached Exhibit â€žn#, â€¢ Redesigned Garage Entry. The garage entry has been relocated further back, to the minimum side yard setback. The reconfiguration provides for a two (2) foot setback from the main level and three (3) foot setback from the second level. â€¢ Redesigned Entry. The first story element is an entry eanopy extending four (4) feet beyond the upper level fagade. Technically, A minimum depth of six (6) feet is required. Staff Comment: The Applicant has attempted to meet the intent of the RDS garage setback as suggested by Staff and staff recommends approval of the revised garage. With regard to the first story element, Staifinds the proposed first story element does not meet the intent or the requirement of the Standard. Also the project would be new construction on the lot which does not have unusual site-specific constraints. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the garage setback and require a minimum of three (3) feet be maintained from the front most fa,ade (upper level) of the house. Staff recommends denial of the first story element variance request. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. , Series of 2011, approving two variance requests from the Residential Design Standards to construct a single-family residence located at 131 Midland Ave." ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - Application (provided 3/1/11) Exhibit B - Updated site plan and elevations BODY OF MARCH lsT MEMO 5 .~el~ 0~~ ~ ~~, 1,:t&4(42&f*?%>>&Me**24*dittlpliâ‚¬#1~*4< 2Pd~%3#{ t:~~i ~1:: ~ ...jÂ» 4 44?1it@Â¢4%*e ~j,Â·t&**54:,46<bbejy@59jktd.:qu'lo$~~1 ', ~: ~~~ , ,~ BODY OF MARCH IST MEMO Applicant: MHR,13, LLC (Jennifer and Brian Hermelin) â€žÂ»-1 11 Representative: Joseph Spears, Studio B Architects Â· Zoning: R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) , IN Lot Size: 5,322 Square Feet Land Use: Single-Family Residence Request Summary: The Applicant is requesting two Variances from certain Residential Design Standards 131 Midland Ave., Existing Front in order to demolish the existing single-family residence and Facade attached garage at 131 Midland Ave and replace it with a new single-family residence and attached garage. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission require the applicant to achieve some setback if not the full ten feet as required by the standard with regard to the garage setback and to deny the first story element variance request. LAND USE REQUESTS: The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing residential structures located at 131 Midland Avenue and is requesting the following land use approvals to redevelop the site with a single-family residence and attached garage: â€¢ Variance approval from the Residential Design Standards pursuant to L.U.C. Section 26.410.020 D.. Variances. The applicant is requesting variances from L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C.2., Parking. garages and carports (requiring the front tat;ade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport to be set back at least ten ( 10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house) and L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 D.2., First story element (requiring all residential building to have a first story street-lacing element). Fi ure 1: Vicinit ma '7Â®4 2t 1 NS WAy A 1180. 2.21 21 131 Midland Ave. erÂ· .4 201 1 1 73 0 1 51 1 10 41- 1 -r: REVIEW PROCEDURE: A variance from the Residential Design Standards shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied after review and consideration during a duly noticed public hearing by the Planning and Zoning Commission under L.U.C. Sections: 26.410.020 D. Variances. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing single-family residence and attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue and replace them with a new single-family residence and attached garage. STAFF ANALYSIS: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES: All new structures in the City of Aspen are required to meet the residential design standards or obtain Â·a variance from the standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410, Residential Design Standards. The purpose of the standards "is to preserve established neighborhood scale and character....ensure that neighborhoods are public places.. ..that each home... contribute to the streetscape." The proposal has been designed to meet the majority of the design standards. The two (2) design standards that are not met by the proposal are 1.) Parking, garages and carports, requiring "the front faâ„¢le of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport to be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall o f the house" and 2.) First story element, "all residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the -.. height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front fa*ade shall not be precluded." Parking, garages and carports The parking, garages and carport standard requires that all residential uses that only have access from a public street provide a garage that is set back from the front facade of the house by at least ten (10) Ret as represented in the example below which is in the Land Use Code. Figure 2: Garage setback The intent of the requirement is toi minimize the presence of ~ garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist." As proposed (Figure 3), the new residence's 1 garage is flush with the front-most wall of the house. J~i Figure 3: Proposed garage selpek 'ft ' . A Â¥ '910 1 , 4 1 I , 675 4007 . 1 7---# , - 20.84 - ---- 1/1 4- 7 - / / \ / 4 - -Uy- 1 1-â€¢ I / . rj 1 9/ J W .1 . 1 1 , 4 . Ar , . iF 1 . 1@ 1 16.11 ' 9. 4 -- - 0 2 4 1 I 9 1 1 J j *0.9 2 4--I -* i , r 4 l, f/ 1 1 \ q --L* 41 - 1. M Â°-053. T -644,22 - - 7w- , G 'U' There are two review standards that the applicant is required to meet if the Commission is to grant a variance from the standard, Section 26.410.020 (D) (2): a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate ki , neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. stajf Finding: As shown in neighborhood photos within the application (Exhibit A), Stall' feels that the Applicant's request to vary the set back requirements of the garage is consistent with the context in which the development is proposed as the neighborhood in which the development is proposed is inconsistent at best with regard to garage location and provides examples of garages that are flush with the ja,ade of the building; however, by locating the garage as proposed greater prominence to the garage is created that does not reflect the intent of the design standard. The lot has the space to meet the intent of the standard and is not unduly burdened with an unusual site specific constraint. There exists an opportunity to meet the intent by either moving the location of the garage, moving the garage element closer to the side yard setback and/or moving the front-most wail of the house closer to the front yard setback. Staff is recommending that the applicant amend the plan and provide some attempt at meeting the standard. Sta#jind only one of the two criterion met. First story element. The first story element standard requires that "all residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty perdent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front fa~ade shall not be precluded." Figure 4: First story element The project as proposed has a porch element which meets the depth and width requirements of the first story element standard; however, it is recessed below the second story and does not meet the first story element standard that there "shall not be i accessible space allowed over the first story element...' 1 ~- - Again, there are two review standards that the applicant is required to meet if the Commission is to grant a variance from the standard, Section 26.410.020 (D)(2): a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding: The residential design standards require certain building elements to be provided "to ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the fagade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions." Stall feels the design of the entry could be amended to provide the required first story element without removing significant portions of the second level A one story element such as an entryway "provides an appropriate domestic scale for a private residence." The proposed project is not situated on a lot with unusual site-specifc constraints. Staff does not find the criterion met. Resolution No. _ (SERIES OF 2011) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ATTACHED GARAGE AT 131 MIDLAND AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from MHRJ3, LLC (Jennifer and Brian Hermelin), requesting Variance approval from certain Residential Design Standards for the construction of a single-family residence and attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department Staff reviewed the application for compliance with the Variance Review Standards; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the Variances from two Residential Design Standards - Parking, garages and cari)orts (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 C.2.) and First story element (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 D.2.), finding that the review standards for the requests have been met; and, WHEREAS, the 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; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission approves with conditions, the noted Variance requests to construct a single-family residence at 131 Midland Avenue, by a vote of to C - _3, 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. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves variances from the following two Residential Design Standards: .. â€¢ L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C.2., Parking, garages and carI)orts (requiring the front fa~ade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a can)ort to be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house). The specific review standard language reads: "The front fa*ade of the garage or the front most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front most wall of the house." A variance to permit the garage to be setback three (3) feet from the upper faÂ©ade is permitted, and â€¢ L.U,C, Section 26.410,040 D,2., First story element (requiring all residential buildings to have a first story street-fueing element). The specific review standard language reads: "all residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front fagade shall not be precluded." The Planning and Zoning Commission has determined the variance requests meet the review criteria outlined in L.U,C, Section 26.410.020 (D)(2). These approvals shall permit the Applicant to construct a single-family residence with an attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue as represented at the public hearing held March 1, 2011. Section 2: The building permit application to develop the above-mentioned residence shall include a copy of the final P&Z Resolution. All other requirements to develop a single family residence shall be submitted as part of the building permit application including but not limited to: adopted building and fire codes, relevant standards within the Aspen Municipal Code such as engineering and water system standards, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations, etcetera. 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. Section 5: 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 plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. APPROVED by the Commission at its meeting on March 1, 2011. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Stan Gibbs, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Site plan (representing approved variance from garage setback) Exhibit B: elevations (representing approved variance from first story element) A 87 6,0 1 e A9 1 1 GARAGE IS NOW nGHT - D '37 13 DL Of NT < TO THE SIDE YARD 4 . 0 SETBACK r / 4,1.Ou 6/5 i Ay GARAGE HAS BEEN 0/ 8- 7 Du l Mo4ED BACKTO y Pl 1 i / I tb FR0M THE FRONT-MOST 1 DUT 8 / FAUDE OF THE UPPER / SOL' 5Â· Â· 6'00 AT 4i L VEL L ~VmL7 20 64DL 6 , g (17 0 l - 4 EEC.) 0 + - -MEâ„¢29 P19- i ~ GARAGE DL9' L 7 O PB i DLE 1.* f UPPER LEVEL OVERHANG 99 1 t- 3 ' OU. tl X ONE-STORY ELEMENT IS / AN ENTRY CANOPY Â® EXTENDING 4'FROM THE 6.6 -:! / - UPPER LEVEL AND 18" . iâ€¢ . BEYOND THE SET-BACK . 7 j AS ALLOWED BY EAVES MAIN LIVING ~ 2 P -1 7 h AND ROOF EXTENSIONS 2 ' 10 - z 25 $ 1 P. 00 Dll Â· ' 1 1 7 . 2, 1 42 45" 4- SIDE YARD SETBACK HAS / L7Â· / 1 1 BEEN MOVED TO T 4 1- 1 1 3 1 1 1 ,2 1 1 IE 1 // / 1 0 --- 4 4 t i NÂ· ' S;DE YARO SETBACÂ® 5 A . / i ./ STE PLAN i Nap .LIT.J'e~ 06'00*W ALLEY- - - - ur / Dok 17 - O -Â·'r P. P Dle' PROPOSED GARAGE SETBACK i /1) AND ONE STORY ELEMENT Al.1 1 5-444>27-Ki- - _ - 0' l ~j SCALE:NTS 1 66.16 i-1 ,~ 1--/ 4 33N3083hl NI13INhIEIH BANHAV EX L 69LB (DONVN1~~V /fa e ' Ag . ~ 141 . 13Â· A. 1/ / Dl DLE L.. 1/- ~--0 - e i , 0Â» ~ 1 42- ) 0 - 6 / ' 6 DLS> N 2/ e. 10 / A h , Pa. 7 / Pl 1- r ' AS DL ,/5 IS 5 , 1 /3 '00 A 7 L #441 20 649L 6 4, --7 (170 1 4, Â¥ / 1 12 / 4 --2,3 GARAGE 1 911- OL9 L I -9 ps * O&8 1 1 './. , , Pe DL 7Â· . ICLN . I 7 /4 1 Â° Ar 4 OLE 0 ~ ' O MAIN LIVJNG 64 - U a , 0 f , 1 1 1 P 1 Dll' I ii 1 0, 8 0 --J el . 1 Li 1 11 /2 1 1 1% 1 f r -1 1 W 01.- I. l / \ [23 - -- L 44 e ~ SM)Â£ Â¥ARO 4 ...4- -- \227 - 1/ ./. 4 MTE W \ LT i -=2=Z %<469 -. ps- N75'06'00'14 _~~ f<Q&44> . - DL6 _____--_ ___~ ~ /13PREVI0U*PROPOSAL Al.1 SHU w jrN L) SCALENTS -:7 66.16 L_ / 42 30N3DISEIhl 1131Alk:13H 3RNaAV IK 1.(L ll9LGOO'N3dSV 34 l\~ C) M *0 09 (INV-10101 .. i 11 1 0 1 i *- 1 44 4 . 4 4 :1t:5 4; 11 Ki I - i { , , m .SiNlIMAJAUMB O lium l m f . isefil *:a. - CO 0 0 4 -> 50 m te:~e~ i 11 , '.' j \ / L.- ...... 1.i 0 r.. VI If m '2410* t / v i.--4---- I. I t. 0 )41-- - 0 7 .w m 2 1 111 -4 4-/.Rette/,I. , 0 1 Â» 0 11 5 1 1 I 4,. ./1...* dot r m - - 09 Elf'Eawnf, 1,#74 1/1 44 m Na wy, 7. ' 0,9~'t z -1 9 1 ~ m =m'te,1,17* . 44 ft ''1 1 1,14 '. Ill iÂ¢il HERMELIN RESIDENCE 6,4:1.11 W 11Â· 11' fli â€¢â€¢ch,1.Cl. A 1 1, 111,11 131 MIDLAND AVENUE ASPEN. CO 81611 M #I l.- 1 L . &/I+Al&'D./.V<6 - 4/6 . u~1 l~r-I . '*4.1.4... %- .... I~. .4.' .g. -.1 ~.Vâ€ž . ' . I <6 * 1.-Il. *I ... . .i Â» L.#." b~% :484~44" Y I - .4 -gl Â»* A &1~4 kl 9/ . . /*4 0. NtW4 ..I -' I I %. 4~ I. '+ ~~-%/ -4-3 Â»A> I '* =:* "8*% f 0 0 P*PI 2-5-1 1 151,rrn;pt 1-- ~ Â«Â» 2 46/ i - -- I 1*46*.15/ 1 - }I 94* Ct: 11* ./ ' 7 I te '6 01 4 1.U . .42Â· 0,2. ' .9: , 1.. 4 . .r: 3/ 4 .1 7. .''t, ~ , , 494 2 4 ,- 4.MI: Â¢ , . i 1 ' ' I.+I 1 ' I. 7 i I. 4 4 1 ' . 1 - P. 4 - 1- -1- .1. I . . 2.3 4 *.Â· , 5 - -~ 6 7424- . . 4,Â· .. 263-*-Pitfk.Ave. Does not meet one-story element ~308-N.-Ralkkve. Does not meet one-story element (puilt EQL/ requirement. Living space above one- (zBuilt2007 requirement. Deck space above one- story element. Canopy extends only 18" story element. passs facade. 1 , L -7 / r 11Â·> i - tw / . . .9, * i. 1 \ 14,/ f . ' :1 . â€¢:i 1 + e. 1 Â· i . 9 v I. A 1 - 1 '*le**31 f / 1 1 -1/ t. 1, 4 1 5-1' I ... .--7 r U .43. 1 31. 21 -2#4 . 1/ 5 .i , a * ; ./21 r '1 t... , 4 ' f ;'~ 1 i ' L- ''' f ' 'C , I;'f I . i 41/1 r Wil J t 1 *C , lij 5 42' I _ K Â·1 0. e. 0,1, 1 = 1 r . 7.e b .Â¥$ I , .*24 i 70 N. Smuggler Does not meet one-story element 73 N. Smuggler Does not meet one-story element re- Grove requirement. Deck space above one- Grove quirement. Living space above one- Built 2007 story element. Built 2007 story element. .' r . ?.04&, 44.- 0 #LLY'Â· Â¥ 'Â· - 4.. 2 2 ., 4.r 9 4;, '. 1. 4*47 9# , Â·1% . gÂ· L --1 I 4% 9 : t. . t . '46*flf. 91. 2 4 :.. if tÂ· L â€¢ .,4, 4.40 , 0 t... J..... Ff r. f. .2 '' 4,41,1 1 Â·/ 4 L - 084 if . ?,2>' Â·2 .1 . 111 * '- 1~ . 4 ... - 41 - 1.-,1 1 2.11 F ' tÂ·â€¢ ' *Â·1 I Â·~-47 4 1 3 . - -- 1 11 *K 1291 S. Riverside Does not meet one-story element -369-B=eoever St. Does not meet one-story element requirement or 10' recessed garage. ~- Built 2~~ requirment. Living space above one- g Built 2010 1 Deck space above one-story element. story element. 3 I \ A-Â¢ 4 U t I .': T '74R &.W. , ' i . 8 ,-.I . t - 9 /--Irlyl I t 77 + ,â€¢ I- -?Fr-- -c' 1 Mii 1- i : . --r,IMI// . . 11 lia a . lili Â°1: 1 h EJ-i Mul / N - i........ 'r#%1,5~ ... F.A . r - - ..r} . .- 1â‚¬ .41Â¥# I r. , 11 4 , . -r . Â· 1 Â» 9 V + *mi . = 21.7-- . 4 1. .308-SE-GAPAve. Does not meet one-story element 126 Park Ave. Does not meet one-story element <Built 2008 ~ requirement. Canopy only extends 4' Built 2000 requirement or recessed garage. Deck L___0.00=:~ from level 2 wall.- space above one-story element. (13 11'41*2 . .. i I J 342. I ' I~ 11 A-= 4 ' '1 4. 1 .' L.. 1 1 1 0 1., ) 44/ I Gfi 2/4Â· + ' f .......-I- ... t ./9 'f - 1 . Le -6 -3 l - tu u '~ - -- - -- & Â· ./.%:41-i_ . t. f.*:E-4, Â¥ 1 1,4 , 9* ' . r t. mUi h-- m 1.-- . 9 - -i .. 13.. .,+ Â· i ,2-0-7 ..i.1*.. _ - 9*42: . ./.. 4 -ht .2 - 14%.1 -23 4 h lu . - 1 - 1 . I .U- t. , - I , 5ds .Ci . - W . r \ f... 505 Hopkins Ave. Does not meet one-story element % . --- I -8 ... - -- Does not meet one-story element re- Built 2010 requirement. Deck space above one- ~ Built 2009 ~ quirement or recessed garage. Canopy story element. ,0-p~ i-L only extends 4' from exterior wall. 1 11 11)111Â§111 . I .1. 1 - '' -'hi~ , .14'f f; 1.i .t U J J ..t ifl'' t 11'. - .â€¢ 47% 4 - C L .454 1 ' 6 .4 -' . 1 % 49.f '- 1.1@ I , tÂ· 4.4 7. Ii: r ./ . 1 1929, i ' >ia, - A :1 . 4 . . 1, ** 1. r r ulll . -t~ ..n~ - 77 - .- L , " Smuggierj Does not meet one-story element 615 Francis Does not meet one-story element <Built2002---0.00,/ =frn=L.Living space above one- (~~~~Built2002 requirement. Living space above one- story element. 0 9 4., r .. '.. 4 1.4* 0 Fflil c M- 7 4 0+riha~ Q. #, -6 , .../ ./ 1 2 1 . I 1 2 'p,4,4/* -SS'B~~* 'V- i e-6. 4=k , 1 - - I 1.'lic /~ C -J ~L . i ..â‚¬4, , - , Il_ 1. . .. - a Ilb,1 Lul - .m/nk . 2~, I k , It Ze I ne --,r~ 11 735 7, 1 r-7- tbaw t-~ 0,1 .:In/'I-I 303 5th Street Does not meet one-story element 735 7th St. Does not meet one-story element Built 2007 requirement. Canopy over entry only Built 2008 requirement. Canopy only extends 18" extends 18". beyond upper level. .. . 4,-- 1 ---f~ r \ A;* - - t' 24 ..4, f - .. -'14 t- *Â· I I ... .~ O i ;,1 - ~ I . - Y- 41.9 ./ ., '-i 1 ./lk . ./17- 43 15, 4 + r 111'.NEL; -41 N L 4:. 04 6 6, ,. f . Mt L 1 . -aci-al 59 - *a,Â·Â·1 0 # 0 1 5,1-- *,2Â¥1. 4 . i. -2,1 3 1...1 a fÂ·.Â·- 1, I /â‚¬1 9 , , i, P.... M./ 2 7 - 1111, Â· '4> Â·Â· ~ 71 2~--.2~9.- -1, 1 .Im D t.6 -1,13-- ft.1. 4 7-rgil .. Al 1,1 ;Â·#Â·4Â· 0, 11--, - - ... 2 1.49 Does not meet one-story element 940 E. Hyman Does not meet one-story element ( Jjuilt 2009 ~ requirement. Canopy over entry only Built 2008 requirement. Living space above one- - extends 18". story element. .. Citv Planning & Zoning Meetine - Minutes - March 01, 2011 Comments 2 Minutes 2 Connicts of Interest 2 131 Midland Ave - Residential Design Standard Variance 2 Code Amendment - Affordable Housing percentaee above grade 1 .. City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 01, 2011 Stan Gibbs called the regular meeting March 01, 2011 to order at 4:35 in Sister Cities meeting Room. P&Z member excused was Jasmine Tygre. P&Z Commissioners in attendance were Michael Wampler, Cliff Weiss, Bert Myrin, Jim DeFrancia, LJ Erspamer and Stan Gibbs. Staff in attendance Jim True, Special City Counsel; Claude Salter, Sara Adams, Community Development ; Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Bert Myrin asked on the future agenda for March 22nd and March 29tb if there was something on the agendas. Jennifer Phelan said the regular AACP meetings were cancelled on those dates. Jim DeFrancia asked i f there was an AACP Meeting next week. Jennifer Phelan stated no; that it was a special meeting. Jackie Lothian noted that the meeting on the 8th was in Council Chambers. Bert Myrin said that code amendments that have come up in the past year or so; is there a time that we can discuss those, maybe in one ofthose 2 meetings. Jennifer Phelan replied that we don't want to put the cart before the horse depending on the code amendment. Cliff Weiss said that Bert has been keeping a list of things that P&Z wanted to tweak. Jennifer Phelan said there was a capacity issue; having a meeting doesn't necessarily mean that you will have staff to be able to do what you were interested in seeing what you want to happen in the time line that you want to see it happen. Stan Gibbs asked if we need a notice for those meetings. Jennifer Phelan replied yes it should be a meeting noticed for 24 hours with a quorum to attend. Jennifer Phelan introduced Claude Salter, the Zoning Officer for the City of Aspen. MINUTES MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve the minutes of February 8~h and February 15~h with change on February 15th on page 8 to "re-graded" seconded by Jim DeFrancia. All in favor APPROVED. Declarations of Conflicts of Interest LJ Erspamer stated that his wife worked for Stewart Title and he knew the people on the title but did not have a conflict. PUBLIC HEARING: 131 Midland Ave. - Residential Design Standards Stan Gibbs opened the public hearing on 131 Midland Ave, residential design standards. Notice was provided. Claude Salter represented the city and introduced 2 .. City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 01, 2011 Joseph Spears and Scott Lindenau from Studio B Architects representing the applicants, Jennifer and Brian Hermelin. Claude Slater gave 3 reasons for the residential design standards criteria that were to preserve and establish the neighborhood scale and character, to ensure the neighborhoods are conducive to walking and require that each home contribute to the streetscape. The applicants were requesting variances from 2 ofthe residential design standards: parking, garages and carport standard and the first story element standard. Slater said if the project proposes appropriate design or pattern of development consistent with the neighborhood with adj acent structures as well as structures in the immediate neighborhood or the second standard is the variance may be granted for reasons of fairness related to site specific constraints of the lot. The garages have to be setback from the front most facade of the house at least 10 feet; the intent of this requirement is to minimize the presence of garages and cari?orts as a relatively lifeless streetscape. Slater said the applicant was proposing a garage that was fiat with the front most wall ofthe house. Staff feels that the lot does not have site specific constraints and the owner is trying to take the best advantage of the views provided from the lot and are asking for their garage to be in a certain space. Slater stated the first story element requires that all residential building shall have a first story street facing element and not have living space above this element. An example of it would be a porch which doesn't have living space above it. The intent of the standard is to provide a human scale to the fagade and enhance the walking experience and reinforce the local building traditions ofthe neighborhood. Slater said the applicant was proposing a first story element that in some ways meets the standards however it does have living space above it; they don't meet it in that they have living space above their first story element. Staff recommends with regards to parking and the garage element that some setback is achieved and for the first story element staff recommends that P&Z deny the first story variance request. Cliff Weiss asked if there were,inconsistencies we don't want it to get any worse. Jennifer Phelan said the intent with new development was to create buildings that meet these standards so they have more typical design characteristics. Phelan said there is an array of architecture and design in this neighborhood and they recognize it; they do think that it is not a site constraint issue but something that they could play with this design and become in more conformance with the intent of setting back the garage element. 3 - 0 0 City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 01, 2011 LJ Erspamer asked if this was in the subdivision with covenants and how do the covenants relate to P&Z judgment tonight. Jim True replied that he didn't know if there were covenants or not but covenants don't relate to your judgment; covenants are a private issue. LJ Erspamer asked if the trees play a role in this. Jennifer Phelan replied that some trees may or may not be able to be cut down but you look at the site the location of the garage is furthest away from the views o f Aspen Mountain. Erspamer said since there are no alleys and there are criteria for this type of garage. Erspamer said you had mentioned immediate neighborhood and a lot of the code talks about neighborhood so the immediate neighborhood means just the homes on that side of the street. Phelan replied typically what we say is the neighborhood, you get to decide what the neighborhood context is; it doesn't say immediate adjacent buildings it could be a block away; whatever you feel a neighborhood context is reasonable to determine. Erspamer said that you talked about walking, there is no sidewalk; what is your concept of a pedestrian there. Salter replied there is a sidewalk across the street and if you don't try to meet some ofthese standards you preclude ever having a sidewalk. Bert Myrin asked if the garage area were uncovered could that same area be used as a driveway without a design variance. Jennifer Phelan replied if it was uncovered but if it was a carport it would still have the same standards. Myrin asked if a garage was required for all residences. Phelan replied no. Myrin asked i f the garage could be shifted to where the kitchen area was; from the zoning perspective ifthe garage was living area could it stililook like it looks. Phelan said the point of the setback for the garage is to have it setback and not be as prominent as the main structure ofthe house. Scott Lindenau said that contextually this area was a transition and this subdivision has a lot of very peculiar complexities to the site. In the existing package the garage faces the street and they are essentially putting the garage in the same place; what doesn't show are the numerous trees that overhang into the setback and the only view is right there. Lindenau said there was a utility box that couldn't be moved and a large boulder and 2 large trees and the property drops and there is a utility pole so there are a lot of site constraints and the lot is oddly shaped. Lindenau said this was a one car garage and it can't be moved because of the tree and the lot is too narrow; if they move the garage back 10 feet the car doesn't fit. Lindenau said the height was 2 feet under the current height limit; so they are at 23 feet. Lindenau said the entrance was a kind of a portal recessed 5 M feet with a 4 . City Plannine & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 01, 2011 small canopy that defines entry. As far as livable space above the front entrance; there were 4 or 5 examples on the same street that are indeed the same case. Lindenau said they could take a look at setting the garage back a couple of feet that was a dilemma because of the setback. Joseph Spears said on the diagram if the garage was located in the center it would be more prominent; not as visually pleasant as to tucking it offto the side. Spears said the one story element was summarized in their packet they delineated the first story from the second with a break dbwn scale; they could get a 12 inch canopy on the front but not a 6 foot because they would have to push the house way back into the trees. Lindenau said the footprint o f the floor plan was just under 15 00 square feet and a lot was below grade. Jim DeFrancia asked the nature o f the variance. Lindenau responded that to get the setback for the garage o f 10 feet from the front of the house without putting the garage in the middle of the building. DeFrancia asked as it is now designed what is the setback ofthe garage. Jennifer Phelan replied that it was flush with the building. Spears said it was 18 inches back from the second story. DeFrancia asked ifthe issue is the setback from the front of the house, not from the property line or building envelope. Phelan answered that was correct so that the main house has more prominence. Spears said that if we didn't have that utility pole and these 2 trees we could probably easily do a garage in this section but removing the trees would be costly and removing the utilities would be costly. DeFrancia asked i f the garage door was glass. Spears replied that it was proposed. DeFrancia said that seems to mitigate its appearance as a garage. DeFrancia asked ifthere was any opinion from the neighbors. Spears said that they mailed everyone and there was no response. Cliff Weiss said that that you are 2 feet under the height allowable and attachment 3 says 1 foot; which is correct. Weiss said there was 2855 feet proposed, how much of that was above grade. Spears replied that was all above grade. Weiss asked how much was below grade. Lindenau replied 4000 square feet total. Stan Gibbs asked if there were windows in the sub-grade space. Spears answered there was a light well. Weiss asked staff to elaborate that ifthe applicant says they can't set it back and he gets the garage in the middle but not on the other end, where does staffthink that they are going to put it. Phelan replied that actually the combined yard setback is 12 feet so they could do 7 feet one side yard and 5 on the other side yard; they could put this as a 5 yard setback closer to the property line and tweak it on the other side. Weiss asked how far it protrudes beyond this entryway and it is flush, how deep is the entryway. Lindenau replied it was 6 feet. Phelan stated the biggest issue with the entryway was the livable space above it. 5 City Plannine & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 01, 2011 Myrin asked if there was an estimated cost on removing the trees and the utilities, other than right in the middle. Spears replied no; these trees were 8 inch caliper so they were probably $15,000.00 to remove them. Lindenau said this part of the site was fIat and it steps down to the large rock and utility pole. Spears said they could look into burying the utility line but that doesn't just go to their house it goes to the neighborhood. DeFrancia said in his mind the entryway was the door; there were existing properties with living space above the doors. Phelan replied correct, there are existing examples and that was something that you will need to determine; does this neighborhood context create the basis for creating a variance or do you feel that the design standards are there for a reason or do you feel that they are tearing down the existing house and are starting with a clean slate so they can comply with the standards. Lindenau said that virtually every house on the street and in the neighborhood all have that same element. Phelan said you don't have to build a porch it could be a one story livable space but that is not how this was designed. Weiss asked when this design code was put into place and when were all these houses built. Phelan said she thought it was 2000 with changes in 2003 and 2005. Lindenau said one o f the challenges of this property was that this wasn't a rectangular lot like in the west end. Weiss said that you made that point but you also said that because of the neighborhood you should be allowed to do what you want to do and I am trying to determine when was the code written and why didn't those other houses comply or were they built before the code was written. Erspamer asked if there were any ADUs on site. Phelan replied there were none proposed. Erspamer asked if there was any mitigation. Phelan responded that there will be and it is handled at building. Erspamer asked if there were any plan in the neighborhood to bury those utilities. Spears replied they willlook into that and there must be an easement to that pole. Erspamer asked if that created a hardship with setbacks. Lindenau replied that he assumed that it would. Erspamer asked what the living quarters above the garage were. Spears replied it was a bedroom. Michael Wampler asked how the footprint of the new house fit on the lot with the house that is already there. Spears responded the proposed house front is about where the house is; the proposed house is a little longer. Stan Gibbs said it looked like the power pole was in the right-of-way not on the front property line. Spears said the utility pole, yes. Gibbs asked i f balconies could go into the setback. Salter replied it was a specific of balcony and it can't be living space above the first story element. 6 .. City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 01. 2011 Weiss asked what is the intent o f no living space above an entry. Phelan replied that it was only i f you have a porch element that is going to meet your first story element requirement so for example you could do a first story element that had been added onto the building that has no second story; the intent is to break up the mass and encourage porch elements that are prominent features. Public Comments: 1. Colleen Grosse said that she lived at 211 Midland and she came to learn what the variances requested were; so this is the first time that she was hearing about it. Colleen Grosse said that she also represented the adjacent neighbor at 201 Midland who is quite impacted by the development. Commission Comments: DeFrancia said it was an attractive design that commensurate with other properties in the neighborhood and the design was done with recognition ofthe constraints that exist on the lot, the grades and the utility structures. DeFrancia said it seems that the variances are appropriate given that the finished product isn't built yet and he looked at it in its totality. Myrin said he would agree with Jim if it was a PUD application but the criteria in the memo is clear that both have to have site constraints; he doesn't see it as completely necessary. Myrin said that staff mentioned the human scale element to the faGade and the intent of the code to break up that mass and scale is not at all done when you have a full wall facing the street. Myrin said the combination of these impact the mass and scale significantly. Myrin supported the staff recommendation. Erspamer asked if any parts ofthis application stop here or is there a final review. Phelan replied that you are the final review. Erspamer said that if the garage moved back a few feet that would help some. Erspamer asked if staff was looking for more dimension in this structure. Myrin replied that was what the code was looking for. Weiss said he asked about intent for a reason and brought up Homestake Drive for a reason; as soon as you allow a variance from design code that is the precedent; why have design guidelines. Weiss said without the information about when the homes were built and i f they received variances he looks at this to throw out the code because it becomes meaningless; he didn't like varying from design guidelines so he was not in favor ofthis as it stands. Weiss said it was all about the code for him. 7 City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes - March 01, 2011 DeFrancia said staff said that some setback of the garage some distance. Phelan replied correct; not necessarily the full 10 feet but P&7 would need to create an appropriate amount. DeFrancia asked looking at this design what would make the first story acceptable. Phelan replied ifthey didn't have living space above the entry; they would meet the porch. Gibbs said what we are presented with is a design that is clearly not what the code intended to produce; the architects need to read the code and end up with a design that does meet the code. Gibbs said making the garage go back is not going to be a productive exercise; what is the distance, the depth, between the front door and the garage. Lindenau replied the entry is 12 feet wide by 6 feet deep. Gibbs said if you could get 6 feet you would still be flush with the front door, that doesn't accomplish anything. Gibbs said that he thinks that it is important and agrees with Cliff in this regard that there are other places where we have applied this code and we just looked at Aspen Walk and asked for them to come back because he couldn't tell where the door was because it didn't meet that same criterion; we were talking major design but there were elements of that entryway that could be improved. Gibbs said to put an eve to break up the mass would be a potential way of going about it. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to support the stajfdirection to request that the applicant of 1 3 1 Midland Ave return with changes in line with the input from this meeting and continue to March 8~h seconded by Jim DeFrancia. All in favor, APPROVED. PUBLIC HEARING: Code Amendment for Affordable Housing percentage of livable area above grade Stan Gibbs opened the continued Public Hearing on the Affordable Housing percentage of livable space above grade. Public notice was provided. Sara Adams said she was here to discuss proposed language for the growth management section o f the code that deals with the development of affordable housing. Adams said projects that are required to develop affordable housing are reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission for Growth Management. They will discuss the criterion that 50% or more ofthe unit's net livable area is at or above finished grade; so that is the focus ofthe discussion. The Planning & Zoning Commission is asked to make a recommendation to City Council. 8 .. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1.1 ' rn ;4 6.J Alk. , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: marcl- i , 20.-ll- STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, 72 Se /7 ti Z&9<-6+AS- (name, please print) being or representing An Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: 1 Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. 1/ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the lday of Fe,6 rkify , 100 f ~ ,to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photogrdph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. v Mailing Of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) .. 1/ Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses o f mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. l/ Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement o f an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners o f real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. A 09 LJ J 4447 Sitnatur~ c The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was ac~pwledged before me this ~ day oi morE/4 , 200Â£ by ,/ 625*') 4 2 *Â»ors WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ymiss>rrerpWÂ«, 09' BO -,BO / / 1Â«Â« ju/v ~ ~AUL / 1 -V ..1 31/11 Q F Notary Public / 2*PIRES SEÂ¥ ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: â€¢ COPY OF THE PUBLICATION â€¢ PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) â€¢ LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL â€¢ APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. Â§24-65.5-103.3 I-1 PUBLIC NOTICE DATE TUESDAY MARCH 1 21 0 TIME 4"P. PLACE. S*STER CITY NCR)Â¥ .i'â€¢ :,A . 110 5 GALENA 5-7 4%5pt 4 PURPOSE' TO CONStOER AN APPLEATION SUBMETTE 0 8 9 Â¥44*21. fBRIAN ANDJENNiFERÂ¥*ERMELAN) 131Â¥15:LANDAH 1*222 ASPEN, CO 81011 WHO ARE THE OWNf RS OF NF SUBJECT PROPERTY THE APPLEANTS ARâ‚¬ PROPOS#NO TO DENOUSH THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE i AND ATTACHED GARAGE AND REPLACE THEM VETH A NE 4 S{NG*E,FAWLÂ¥ R:[SIDENCE AND ATTACHED GARAGE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS DEER,f.ED PREÂ¥t>USLY â„¢f APPLICANT d REOUEST #,5 'RE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMEN'T APPROVAL Â·. 4,~Â·AA .f ' ; R' r CERTAIN REWDENTiAL DE:SÂ¢GN STANDARDS Fl* FUIRENER ,/CIIATII CONTA< 1 CiAJO* *YE* AT â„¢t CfTÂ¥ O* AS;â€¢tkÂ¢Â£~**T' 21*iOMEN'10*PARTE'ENT t* $ 146*4 r *setâ€¢ U) ".0 42'@ 2&1 00.... 7 *t<* ~~ .V . 't~ _ *9 4 Â« .* 4 .% ./1 /1 I . 1-.- 1 Â¥/ 1 d Â· 1-~i-'S . 1- I . . f Â¥ Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A m Bend along line to -L ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® | Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® . Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ ~ A . 1 1207 EAST HOPKINS HOLDINGS LLC 111 PARK AVE LLC 1215 EAST HOPKINS LLC SHERMAN & HOWARD 111 PARK AVE 1215 E HOPKINS AVE 201 N MILL ST #201 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 139 ROBINSON RD CABIN LLC 257 PARK AVENUE LLC ADAIR ARJA P JR 3902 WATERS EDGE DR 600 N 3RD ST 5375 S GENEVA WY AUSTIN, TX 78731 ASPEN, CO 81611 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING ASPEN ELF BENNETT NEIL J AUTHORITY PO BOX 886 214 PARK AV 530 E MAI N ST #001 LANCASTER, TX 75143 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 BLUE SKYE DAISY BROOKE PTNRSHP BOLERJACK LISA BROWN DONALD LLLP 412 KATHRYNS WY PO BOX 811 1024 E HOPKINS #17 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-2405 ASPEN, CO 81611 BROWN IRVING M & BARBARA J CANTRELL WESLEY R CASTLE CREEK HOLDINGS CO 2600 ISLAND BLVD #706 104 KATHRYNS WY PO BOX 56109 AVENTURA, FL 33160 ASPEN, CO 81611-2405 HOUSTON, TX 77256 CAVE DERYK CHASE ROBERT M & CYNTHIA CHURCHILL AUDREY LEE TRST 326 MIDLAND AVE #308 151 PARK AVE 4541 BRIGHTON RD ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENCOE, IL 60022 CORONA DEL MAR, CA 92625-3101 CITY OF ASPEN COHEN ERIC R 25% COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA ATTN FINANCE DEPT PO BOX 9764 PO BOX 1927 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81612 CARSON CITY, NV 89702 ASPEN, CO 81611 CORBIN MARCIA A DACOSTA MAUREEN DEELGUEA ALEJANDRO ORTIZ PO BOX 9312 PO BOX I (EYE) PO BOX 9871 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 DEJEAN FELIX A 111 & CAROLYNE DEROSE JAMES F & MAUREEN C 1/3 DIRUSSO JOANNA 1368 KATHERINE DR 439 N WELLS 2ND FLOOR PO BOX 10906 OPELOUSAS, LA 70570 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ASPEN, CO 81612 DOYLE JOHN F & LAURIE FRAMPTON EISENSTAT DAVID H & NINA ELLIOTT ELYSE ANNE PO BOX 12236 125 PARK AVE 610 NORTH ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 Etiquettes faciles A peler 1 A Repliez a la hachure afin de I www.avery.com 1 Sens de I Utilisez le aabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® , charoement r*vdler le rebord Pop-UPTM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY A Easy PeelÂ® Labels ~ A ~ Bend along line to Use AveryÂ® remplate 5160Â® . Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢~ ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® ~ A ERNST TERSIA V FOWLER MARK C & PEMILA L GLICK DANIEL 206 KATHRYNS WY PO BOX 326 PO BOX 9910 ASPEN, CO 81611-2405 MOAB, UT 84532 ASPEN, CO 81612 GUGLIELMO KNANSEE L HARRISON MARK N 2/3 INT GROSZ COLLEEN A TRUST LIFE ESTATE FISH EILEEN M 1/3 INT 155 N HARBOR DR #3612 514 KATHRYNS WY 546 14TH ST CHICAGO, IL 60601 ASPEN, CO 81611 BOULDER, CO 80302 HENRY PATRICK JR & LORI ANNE JARRELL KIMBERLY WILSON LAFOUNTAINE ANTOINETTE WELLS FARGO DM/ATT LAURA MAY 102 KATHRYNS WY A2 410 KATHRYNS WY #Dl 666 WALNUT N8200 030 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DES MOINES, IA 50309 LEAVITT DEREK LAUGHREN DAVID LEAVITT FAMILY TRUST C/O MORRISON & FOERSTER PO BOX 1265 4721 ADMIRALTY WAY #561 555 W FIFTH ST ASPEN, CO 81612 MARINA DEL REY, CA 90292 LOS ANGELES, CA 90013-1024 MARSHALL THOMAS M & ELLEN M REV LEAVITT GRANT OLIVER LEVENTHAL ROBERT B TRUSTS 201 MANCHESTER AVE 515 KATHRYNS WY 300 RIVERSIDE AVE PLAYA DEL REY, CA 90283 ASPEN, CO 81611-2405 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCGOVERN PJ & LISA MERZBACH NINA MILLER LEE I & SUZANNE K 1/3 101 S THIRD ST #360 PO BOX 3465 439 N WELLS 2ND FLOOR GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60610 NICOLETTI PAUL J 111 TRUST MOHWINKEL CLIFF NOVAK THEODORE J & CAROL E 1/3 C/O HENRY BEGUELIN PO BOX 9457 439 N WELLS 2ND FLOOR 614 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ASPEN, CO 81611 PEARCE VIRGINIA PIEPHO KARL W POLLOCK PERRY H 1195 E COOPER AVE #A PO BOX 10014 PO BOX 950 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 PRICE LINDA J TRUST REDMOND JOHN B & LYNN G RODELL TIMOTHY C & MARJORIE M COAL CREEK CAPITAL MGMT 207 KATHRYNS WY #B3 PO BOX 8005 1371 HECLA DR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612-8005 LOUISVILLE, CO 80027 SANDLER RICKY & MARA ROSS MATTHEW N 75% SANDLER LIVING TRUST 8/5/99 C/O EMINENCE CAPITAL LLC 175 RIVER OAKS LN 201 S BURLINGAME AVE 65 E 55TH ST 25TH FLR BASALT, CO 81621-9382 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 NEW YORK, NY 10027 Etiquettes faciles A peler j A Repliez 6 la hachure afin de i www.avery.com 9 Utilisez le qabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i charaement A Sens de 1-800-GO-AVERY ' rdvaler le rebord Pop-UpTM ; Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A 0 Bend along line to ~ ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Â£ Useh'eryÂ®-Template 5160Â® ~ Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeT SCARLETT ROBIN SIMMONS SUSAN SPECK KARIN C 413 KATHRYNS WY 101 KATHRYNS WY PO BOX 9912 ASPEN, CO 81611-2405 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 STONE RONALD TAUSCHER ETNA ZALE MILTON TRUST 847 W GEORGE ST 107 PARK AVE 3824 N ASHLAND AVE CHICAGO, IL 606575113 ASPEN, CO 81611-2425 CHICAGO, IL 60613 A Etiquettes faciles & peler Repliez a la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com ~ Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® rZv@ler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ 1 1-800-GO-AVERY charnement A .. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 31 3 Flabvwd A.% , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: +11;3.~GA1 +40.,ck i e Le.<Dfrn , 2011 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) - -41,7/A â‚¬>66644 (name. please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally , certify that i have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (IE) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: U/"' Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy offhe publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials. which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high. and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of ,20 ,to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted nolice (kign) iS aitached herejo. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared rio more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public heating. .4 copy ofthe owners and governmenial agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) .. Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signatu?6 The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this N day Â· of drin uâ€¢~J , 2011, by 74/1 C.1-eth Sr<Wâ‚¬-(-1 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My,mmission expires: 0-4 54W-f (A 2& (f f LINDA M. 5 (4& L.#14(=16 4 /:8 *ar 2/ Notary Public My Commissior Expires 03/29/2014 ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: * COPY OF THE PUBLICATION * PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) * LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED BY MAIL * APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. Â§24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 131 MIDAND AVE., RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANADRD vARIANCES LAND USE REQUEST NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, at a r meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m, before the Aspen Plannino and Zoning Commission, Sisters City ' Room, City Hall. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen. to 0 consider an application submitted by MHAJ3. LLC (Jennifer and Brian Hermetin), 131 Midland Ave, Aspen, CO 81611. who are the owners of the subject properly. The applicants are proposing to demolish the existing single-family residence and attached garage and replace them with a new single-family residence and attached garage.In order to develop the property as described previously, the applicant is requesting the following development approval: variances from certain residential design standards. The property is legally described as: PARCEL A LOT 3, BLOCK 7. RIVERSIDE ADDITION, EXCEPTING FROM SAIDLOT 3, THE SOUTHERLY 15 FEET. / EARCEL BÂ· A PORTION OF LOT 7, BLOCK 1 PROMOTORY SUBDIVISION. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A AT PAGE 240 OF THE RECORDS FOR PITKIN COUNTY. MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS. BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 8 SAID PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION BEARS N75Â°06'W 3,61 FEET; THENCE S75<06'E 46 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8. THENCE N 17'45'E 40 FEET, THENCE N75Â°06W 16 FEET: THENCE IN A SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY COURSE ON A STRAIGHT LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL C: A PORTION OF LOT 8, BLOCK 1 PROMONTO- ~ RY SUBDIVISION, WHICH SUBDIVISION PLAT IS RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO.105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A AT PAGE 240 OF THE RECORDS FOR PITKIN COUNTY, MOAE PAR- TICULARY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWSÂ· BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE | NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8 BEARS N17'45'E 20.92 FEET: THENCE N17Â°45'E 20.92 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8, , WHICH IS ALSO THE SOUTHEAST CORNEA OF 1 LOT 7. SAID BLOCK 1: THENCE N75Â°06'W 49.61 l FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID ~ LOT 8, THENCE S24Â°06'W TO A POINT 15 FEET - , NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF I LOT 3; BLOCK 7. RIVERSIDE ADDITION; ~ 1 THENCE $75Â°06'E TO THE POINT OF 1 INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTEALY LINE OF I SAID LOT 8: THENCE N24Â°37'E TO THE POINT r OF BEGINNING. City Aspen, County ot Pitkin, 1 City of Aspen Community Development Depart- For further Information. contact Claude Salter at the ment. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen. CO, (970) 429.2752. claude,salter@ci.asoen.co.us. *litor, G#Â®s.Q-baff Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on Januart ' 30, 2011. [6099347] --1 Any information provided may be used for that purpose. Â©Colorado Pub#c Trustees' Association Revised 12/2009 Published in the Aspen Times Weekly or January 23,30, & February 6,13,20,2011. [6074083] PUBLIC NOTICE COMBINED NOTICE - PUBLICAnON CRS Â§38-38-103 FORECLOSURE SALE NO. 10-124 iTo Whom It May Concern: This Notice is given with 1 Iregard to the following described Deed of Trust: On November 11,2010, the undersigned Public | Â·Trustee caused the Notice of Election and De- mand relating to the Deed of Trust described be- ~ low to be recorded in the County of Pitkin records. Original Grantor(s) C ELIZABETH MURRAY ' Original Beneficiary(ies) WELLS FARGO BANK. N.A. Current Holder of Evidence of Debt WELLS FARGO BANK, NA : Date of Deed of Trust: 9/21/2007 ~ County of Recording: Pitkin Recordihg Date of Deed of Tiust 9/28/200 Recording Reception Number: 542566 ~ Original Principal Amount: $1,000,000.00 ~ Outstanding Principal Balance: $1,000,000.00 Pursuant to CRS Â§38-38-101 (4)(i), you are hereby ! notified that the covenants of the deed of trust have oeen violated for reasons kluding. but not limited , to, the failure to make payments as provided for in the Deed of Trust and Negotiable Instrument. THE LIEN FORECLOSED MAY NOT BE A FIRST LIEN. rHE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN IS ALL OF THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY ENCUM- BERED BY THE LIEN OF THE DEED OF TRUST. PARCEL 3, AS SHOWN ON THE CROWN MOUNTAIN RANCH AMENDED SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT WITH LOT LINE ADJUST- MENT, FILED DECEMBER 12,2006 IN PLAT BOOK 82 AT PAGE 16, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO Also known by street and number as: ' 111 WEST SOPRIS CREEK ROAD, , BASALT, CO 81621 ' NOTICE OF SALE rhe current holder of the Evidence of Debt secured by the Deed of Trust, described herein, 3 ias filed Notice of Election and Demand tor sale as >rovided by law and in said Deed of Trust. THEREFORE. Notice Is Herebv Given that I will Al ~ Sunday, Janua Recording Date of Deed of Trust: 6/5/2008 L Recording Reception Number: 550052 1 Original Principal Amount: $2,582,982.00 1 Outstanding Principal Balance: $2,573,216.93 1 'Pursuant to CRS Â§38-38-101(4)(I),you are hereby e notified that the covenants of the deed of trust have i been violated as follows: (i) failure to make the , northly payments of $15,913.83 due on Septem- I ler 3, 2010, and October 3,2010; and (Ii) Borrow- : 3 r has failed to pay property taxes in the amount of 54,456.86 as required by the Deed of Trust. -HE LIEN FORECLOSED MAY NAT 8 a =imar .. P1 MEMORANDUM VA To: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Directbt._1 FROM: Claude Salter, Zoning Officer RE: 131 Midland Ave - Residential Design Standards Variances, - Public Hearing DATE: March 1,2011 Applicant: MHR)3, LLC (Jennifer and Brian Hermelin) Representative: Joseph Spears, Studio B Architects Â· Zoning: R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Lot Size: 5,332 Square Feet - 1~-:41 Land Use: Single-Family Residence â‚¬ R- ..r, Request Summarv: The Applicant is requesting two Variances from certain Residential Design Standards 13 1 Midland Ave., Existing Front in order to demolish the existing single-family residence and Facade attached garage at 131 Midland Ave and replace it with a new single-family residence and attached garage. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission require the applicant to achieve some setback if not the full ten feet as required by the standard with regard to the garage setback and to deny the first story element variance request. LAND USE REQUESTS: The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing residential structures located at 131 Midland Avenue and is requesting the following land use approvals to redevelop the site with a single-family residence and attached garage: â€¢ Variance approval from the Residential Design Standards pursuant to L.U.C. Section 26.410.020 D., Variances. The applicant is requesting variances from L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C.2., Parking, garages and carports (requiring the front facade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport to be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house) and L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 D.2., First story element (requiring all residential building to have a first story street-facing element). 4' .. P2 Figure 1: Vici*i~ Ihap - HLER GRO _06 HOPKINS .//1160â€¢ .hli- -Ne 2 1/**Ct*&.40 1 _I \954"u,"97212"TBZ kit# ~ D p -.j.4/*19/al:11 Â£120 --- 4-ui -- 1 ~-~ KATH~.ir.AY . O-ACE'~4 -Slgjb 1 31"kt ip:, liE 1 A X =9**::WriJA-'1% .06 Â« - 131 Midland Ave. SOo M. 4.- Fort R,var 9 4#6649< . O ~11; .'- ' 5.68 | 3 : el.M|,; , -Â¥.Â· J. -2737.Ttos RBAW 0. - 2 112 - .Flh <3 â€¢- u J~ 224 3 nU~ 1 4(03.1**21 ,/Milimit 8/6,1 'AL,* 9 1 Â£ METa. ..111O1~F .,108 ..: V 1 102 Alb 100 . >20-4. 1 13091 16 ... 4 /4 1 . ..Cli .4 1 V. .:. Â£ 04 4,). 4 rihilf i REVIEW PROCEDURE: A variance from the Residential Design Standards shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied after review and consideration during a duly noticed public hearing by the Planning and Zoning Commission under L.U.C. Sections: 26.410.020 D. Variances. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant is proposing to demolish the existing single-family residence and attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue and replace them with a new single-family residence and attached garage. STAFF ANALYSIS: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES: All new structures in the City of Aspen are required to meet the residential design standards or obtain a variance from the standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410, Residential Design Standards. The purpose of the standards "is to preserve established neighborhood scale and character....ensure that neighborhoods are public places....that each home... contribute to the streetscape." The proposal has been designed to meet the majority of the design standards. The two (2) design standards that are not met by the proposal are 1.) Parking, garages and carports, requiring "the front fagacle of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport to be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house" and 2.) First story element, "all residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the 12 N RIVERSIDE AVE .. P3 height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front faGade shall not be precluded." Parking, garages and carports The parking, garages and carport standard requires that all residential uses that only have access from a public street provide a garage that is set back from the front facade of the house by at least ten (10) feet as represented in the example below which is in the Land Use Code. Figure 2: Garage setback The intent of the requirement is to: minimize the presence of 1 -- ~ garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist." As proposed (Figure 3), the new residence's garage is flush with the front-most wall of the house. , --70*1 i Figure 3: Proposed garage setback .@3 .1 e 1---' - | 1 .1 6 P d 1 1 9 - - \\ 4, 4/ / 0/ + : C.2 1 ' 7/ -L- 1 I - iIi 57% .,Â£, - 12~ Â°06'00"ZE # 1 " - 10 lit i /1 1 J- y iÂ« - * 4.12.14>~St 1/ 7 _ CAL~92..7 E \ t/ , ti i-.'9*4 / CLO / 4 9 - -7 68* , / : 1, . 1 ~ 0 17 1 - 4 - ./-10 P6â€¢ 1 DU 11 - 14 / : N â€¢ -7 &. I *Ah. 1 e f# I 1 . 0 Ar 67 9. 01 1,1 0 N 11 - ? F \ N IN . \ 11 4.- ./ 41 01. 9. / /* 9 AP \ , ' I / /7951 a 00: 4/1 Lr :. el g 1 N 6 11 // / 4 1 x&- 11(% *. 'V,DSS;al# . I 06. . 8. 4 *5Â°os.~~MO- Air. 2.-- - - Â©3,9*f L/ PS DLe - Â§4502* 2 2/2:=.iÂ·' --- - -7 (9 ~ .~ , 8. 16, There are two review standards that the applicant is required to meet if the Commission is to grant a variance from the standard, Section 26.410.020 (D)(2): a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate 13 ~~=- - ~~~ .34 /~*tkp 4*.el .. neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding: As shown in neighborhood photos within the application (Exhibit A), Staff feels that the Applicant's request to vary the set back requirements of the garage is consistent with the context in which the development is proposed as the neighborhood in which the development is proposed is inconsistent at best with regard to garage location and provides examples of garages that are flush with the fagade of the building; however, by locating the garage as proposed greater prominence to the garage is created that does not reflect the intent of the design standard. The lot has the space to meet the intent of the standard and is not unduly burdened with an unusual site specific constraint. There exists an opportunity to meet the intent by either moving the location ofthe garage, moving the garage element closer to the side yard setback and/or moving the front-most wall of the house closer to the front yard setback. Staff is recommending that the applicant amend the plan and provide some attempt at meeting the standard. Sta#Jind only one of the two criterion met. First story element. The first story element standard requires that "all residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front faGade shall not be precluded." Figure 4: First story element The project as proposed has a porch element which meets the depth and width requirements of the first story element BU standard; however, it is recessed below the second story and does not meet the first story element standard that there "shall not be A eli.: 111 ~ 11 accessible space allowed over the first story element..." ' Again, there are two review standards that the applicant is required to meet if the Commission is to grant a variance from the standard, Section 26.410.020 (D)(2): a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or 14 6 .. P5 b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding: The residential design standards require certain building elements to be provided "to ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the fagade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions." Staff feels the design of the entry could be amended to provide the required first story element without removing significant portions of the second level. A one story element such as an entryway "provides an appropriate domestic scale for a private residence. The proposed project is not situated on a lot with unusual site-specific constraints. Staff does not find the criterion met. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the request does not meet the variance review standards that are set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 D, Variances. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission require the applicant to achieve some setback if not the full ten feet as required by the standard with regard to the garage setback and to deny the first story element variance request. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. , Series of 2011, approving two variance requests from the Residential Design Standards to construct a single-family residence located at 131 Midland Ave." ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A -- Application 15 .. J . P6 Resolution No. (SERIES OF 2011) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ATTACHED GARAGE AT 131 MIDLAND AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from MHRJ3, LLC (Jennifer and Brian Hermelin), requesting Variance approval from certain Residential Design Standards for the construction of a single-family residence and attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department Staff reviewed the application for compliance with the Variance Review Standards; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the Variances from two Residential Design Standards - Parking, garages and carports (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 C.2.) and First story element (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 D.2.), finding that the review standards for the requests have been met; and, WHEREAS, the 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; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission approves with conditions, the noted Variance requests to construct a single-family residence at 131 Midland Avenue, by a vote of to C - _), 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. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves variances from the following two Residential Design Standards: Page 1 of 5 .. P7 â€¢ L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C.2., Parking, garages and carports (requiring the front fa~ade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a earport to be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house). The specific review standard language reads: "The front fagade of the garage or the front most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front most wall of the house." and â€¢ L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 D.2., First story element (requiring all residential buildings to have a first story street-facing element). The specific review standard language reads: "all residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front fagade shall not be precluded." The Planning and Zoning Commission has determined the variance requests meet the review criteria outlined in L.U.C. Section 26.410.020 (D)(2). These approvals shall permit the Applicant to construct a single-family residence with an attached garage located at 131 Midland Avenue as represented at the public hearing held March 1,2011. Section 2: The building permit application to develop the above-mentioned residence shall include a copy of the final P&Z Resolution. All other requirements to develop a single family residence shall be submitted as part of the building permit application including but not limited to: adopted building and fire codes, relevant standards within the Aspen Municipal Code such as engineering and water system standards, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations, etcetera. 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. Section 5: 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 plan .. P8 development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. APPROVED by the Commission at its meeting on March 1, 2011. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Stan Gibbs, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Site plan (representing approved variance from garage setback) Exhibit B: elevations (representing approved variance from first story element) .... 1- LOT AREA 5,321 SF O O 0 7 i N21Â°50'00"E 61.18' 0 -T-7- -El---01 --CL- __C_- __.O_ -_ 31 -_ [El- 1 .0 - 0= 071 O -1 -. 1% r . CO .... r.-1 il - *11' 910** 4 1<1 12 -6 03 M 9/ 3 Â·s 31 i r 4 REAR YARD SETBACK- *RA*]414)4(01421 4- 7 (1 %1 6 911 . m 4-4 1 N 4 111 0 0 rup C 63 I i In . 1 0 '.W .. ..1 \ 1, S 0. * 1 , 1 1 Â»V~ 9 POSSIBLE ---\\ 2/4, %<\ P 20' X 16' GARAGE / / 19, p \\\%Po %%% T ~!~ ~ 7~ * 7/~i-X 0 8 \24 Ct mil I 2% < i % 10 a il - 1 I t i i i ' /1 .: Â»b O ' \44-9, TOO SMA~i; F A WISE Â·<"I Â·'i~ 41*~f.:*:4*2~&11~t l :0 4 CE 10 FR SJ UTE ROCK O .- GARAG2/l 03 0-61 A .-,1 -lk r#. .A -r CA' I b o I. 1 -4 - O/ ~ 1 7 0 O t . , 9 C I r lu) 04 + . %/ 13.8 10'FRONT YARDGETBA K ~ , m & *31 1 ---- r / cD I Â· 14 ----- 4, i --- 1 -- --1-- RNâ‚¬-F~: 93(-1- - 16.5 0 6 ------- ONT YARD SETBACK .- 4 0 Fliti 1 9 \ 04 64\ -- -----~--_,~ FRONT YARD SETBACK 7 / 9 1 0 .1 0 '00"vv h c . r. *ix\ -' 1 1 =14 .1 81 0 , b 4Â°37'00"W S17Â°45'00"W 5- r 5 Sj 7Â°45'00"W --440 - w. - - -/r 40.00' 4 DL- 20.92' POSSIBLE GARAGE 1 '01 -1 ZONE, BASDED ON \. CONSTRAINTS AND DESI N _ EXISTING 40' SPRUCE TREES ~STANDARDS EDGE OF PAVEMENT / 1 h D IAGRAM 1 EXISTING 40' UTILITY POLE ~ SCALE NTS 9Zâ‚¬Z #Sl BV83kl 9# 48444 S75Â°06'00"E SÂ»45 M.00.900 BURRES PARCEL >10Â¥8139 au ts 46 3-91 g. 16 0' se 6 L.- , .,.2,1. f: 7. -- - Â· "43 - - 1 - " . < -41,6 4 1-*~~~ 4/ . f Ah ., t. . h. f all.Imit im~ f - es 4-â€¢ 2 . ' / Elr .... . Il c . i,m l. 6.-, 1 - 1 * 111 1. - --*.-- 4 I -*. -I -...E. ---1.1.-- ./.- - 11, ./ - .321 :.I: .â‚¬. r- .... 1 I < "W..W 44 - .- 21 =2 - - 76. . -;j.:...mat . I. ./ - -Ic.3, .4.4Â£4 . . .4 1 4~. - ... r. . , ''5 - i- - . 1. ....7 09 , -- ' a -1 - - . 4 - -- *--*0-4,9,1,",1.0.- 4.4 > ' .2 . -- , <., a . : I . 1., - .fl ./.- 14 ,!I'lil ...i in -- -r - /M~;L~.*'Erre /r '. 4 t,el 1 1/6.lit'. -1 i. 2, ./. .1 - - 6 -= .1 - - 4 1 ... 1 .3 1:,4 'i -47 .-t . --GrILT"./*./ X I -- f ....... 4 .Vt..t * + , '1* 11.- > ' -2 ' -- I.* 1 . 4 6 I - . 1. i , 75.- 1 7,00.-m= 6-0.- 1=/ - -6 -le i iEir:- a 4 4-4 f err a -24-2 2 >23 1 N. ifTI-~ to 0Â¥ . A . .5 ,â€¢ 46 -. -- -,1. - /#34 /--b- 4 .:al-â‚¬ iti ..4 Â¢*it./9/1//REr,I . . . I . .- .'-'I-.I ,- - A#, U "-2.- . :3?05/...../ ~FÂ·*1, 13- A-'.irt: 'a ,!F. -1/ 421.Â·4 -3 )3 44~ :r %62. : '. '4!r . 4/ /r . 4 4 D , - riÂ» -9 1 ~ li|. Â·54 441 1, I 2 .. 4 .En 0-2 - 1*1 *7% 1 * 1 .fet 1- -12Agi' / __- ?: -4 17-Â· t<- ~t I â‚¬E : i t.Â· 4 + ... 17" .4.2 1%471 1 > 41 <'- 37 / E -.:r -i .s~/- JAA**S. .ir.1 1./7 - Â¥ . 1 46 ...'......I-=.Il.-*:#. - 71'/- 1/f ...., . 1-1 1 -- ': 92 4.78 5~41. 1 . Mu* _ 1231- - -_ ...9... 34 0 '1 - I ..Ff#6 . â€¢ . - 4.-8.1 - . 2 / .4 - ' ' ..~.4 :. \11,3, ... l.k G) 7, I 875 6b . ... .. / . 0.... 6.0, - - â‚¬ .:47& .. , r. 1 , ~--A - (41 . N.~ PO~~' - 18, 13'0DL ~~~ 10" 3 1 DLT 6 L . A- - 6 0, 6 r -1 1// 0/ 4 1 3 0 't' 1 //li 1 1 /.1/ - 44 73 - f -9 ///t 1 1 375Â°06'00"E 1 1 / 2 44 20.64' / -1 / 4 --10 4// 1 Â®~CJ /2 1 1 / L - 1 rpo~ f ' 1 1- - 1 /yA- 1 / 44, '044'Â·\~ / DL9' 7 Ln - PIf'/ 1 1 1 DL' 1 3 , / WN r.j // 11 1 1 *a %1 / *44 0 P6" DLT \ f 0 0 4 A. 21 ' . 0% J / 31 -= FE ~i - 0. O Â·Â·sÂ»J./.. AT' 27\ ICL f 0 1 1 1 / 90,2 DLB' Cy 8 .t j i 1 1 2 A- I \ L. PJ 7 E 11 11 =111 1 - ... 4 1%1 1. 41 â„¢\ i \ '2 -6 r & I. 4 O \ 0 1/ .P -Â» P' f f + 1 1. 2 L | 1 '5.1, Â· I :~1 9 / TO f w 1 1/1 3 / 0 \\\ 1/ ., 12 // \ r.// --- 1 - 9 0 1093* / A5" / I 1 1 I l , LT 1 \ 11 2 0 1 \ \1 11 Â» 3-V--A i 0 4% /1 h i L 1, 1 , / o / / if 2 4, REV St>.5 Novamber 2010 L & 1 I REV DC.20 DecambeF 201) DE)-5 Jo--, 2010 1 1 1 L- 4$3 1 I /<i# 84 ; 10& p O : t A V 1 1. 1 SIDE YARD SETBACK 5 L ' 1 -1 r ./ Jo 1 11 I. , \ Rev. Date. 11 JI/%,ry 2011 -: Lr - PB. Construdlon 064&482--- - ' 9.1//1 - DL6' -te: 00 DATE 0000 I'll'.Tlee: -- +M - /. l & - r - -- SHAD-6*Â·647Â·- -.z..2 1,(./ - SITE PLAN J--3 13 . . 6.16' U /\ N --- .* 7 /1 3 MAIN LEVEL SITE PLAN ~|~\ Al.1 / S83Â°11'21 f 1 6 0 ~~ SCALE : 3/16" = 1' 9 ..... U/7 1 Ch 1362.38' f />1 1 9 1 // .............. 3ON3aIS3k:I NI13IAIEIEIH 3nNBAV aNVIC]1181 Ket LL91,8 00 'N3dSV 9 20 Â¥ e 3102 L, . K e..M.../1 ./.*f1 t 8= der, .-429 \ O 0 4 flo ; LIli....1 1 --- 1â€žr--2- 1, 4 - ./8 r- â€ž , am t.l , t.- T 2 -0 z -0 ~ bÂ£. 0/ lwâ€¢9 I :I ; 4 3. p ' Ir. - .*14' rp..,4 0 Â·TÂ¢ Â·42 1, , 1 0 m 4~~2*..922/Z j , 4,Amifw* 9 , m 1. 61 U .. cnb 1 A- .7â€ž-0 4~ .Â· ~ . . Â·t# c/) 4 --1 " b#.'f %41.1 -7. -1 : 7. i.:.Â·:%/ 'e' iak, 4.... 0.10... , rai~ m 1 - - 4 Â»t; 4Â· i'~:444Â· ~. ' I. V 92 .4 & .0.4. .. i Ptl/.01. .1. ..11 1 4 r . a . .t . 2 ./A,.,-7....d 1. $ 3 . N #1.. E 12-1,414 e- ' ..Dh,106. i.*A ..11 /6, * 204*tifi(.9;U ' 'ai="-~ i C =Â¥4 / 1%.1 4/. -41 - '21.e:, *f...2â‚¬ Ni- â€¢ 4.1161 r... + L LF :,i:U / 1/ r . , '9 2 L .. - .:.t t Â·JÂ· g,- 0 0 m r t, 1 -*- 2 -0 .I 0 2 O m 41 - 0 -4 1 ' : , 1 1 - *21 4 ZE 5 l) 0 8 HERMELIN RESIDENCE Jj architects 8. - 131 MIDLAND AVENUE 'i _ 1. 4 110. /41/ (1) ASPEN, CO 81611 ' Â· - 4.RET' ALL RiGHTS NE.RvED =.PA 31Â¥OS SCALE : 1/4" = .. 44'. S010Hd 1300IN â€ž.ele' ial XV ..uÂ·le....S A321 .... .,43-. STONE VE~EEER ~ 1 91;-2-Er= -0 ---4 1 C ./ 3Â· CONCRETE WINDOW CAS'. 2-/ CA- ./ . I ir. 1 1 1 1 4, r. P ..4,2 Â«- STOREFRONTWIN[X~S 4. r -; 'f[ iÂ·'f 7,45;32 ; - f :- 42, TPARAPE-71 0.-1 .1- 216 . ELEV: 122-/1/2- 11 Â·17)Â»U / 1 .~ I.bt_yl QQ' >i:t:*.Â£04 BIEUNG ELEV: 119'-e CÂ·f' .d,#j.. 0-1-1 - C:<.21 Zf'113.-?1.-9935-:ffle.2.... A 0 SOFFIT TO BE GFRC L.' â‚¬.t/Â«6 Â»C Z CONCRETEE PANELS 08.STED , 2 9, 580 LU O U.1 SPOOTH ARCHITECTURAL- CONCRETE - Dr . Z r ...:.,... 'C: t, 24 Jâ‚¬ r. 1,r.. -1 - 1-1 2-lf â€žtf=- LU <0 TRY R EUV. 110-e B.STRUCTURE - ELEW: 10- â€¢ :.-~ - kz,r3,4.. 4,Â» 00 Â® T E-7 9,A~BLASTEDGLASS ~ 4 4 ZO 5 z- 1 4 - -,Cy .42 1 Â» r'. 2 3, SANDILASTED GLASS ~ Â·- '44,-,-Â·- -';~1,~ L- i ,ffÂ¢C~~ 42<7%4111~Â·Â·:R., ' 5 0 ./ 6 0 .-::/9:'/O'.P'/OW- .-'-~ft'-.</-./.'ag r. < CO 11 11 1,11 L . r:%24 T.PLY EXISTING / FINIS GRA ' Â· 4 |' - 2- 1-Â·- b a k ELEV: 100'â‚¬ I T.CONCRETE L _-_ _-_:1_lk_:-111 - 2-41 | ~ '1 EllyÂ·91% -----------------------------------------------------------1 1 |~ SMOOTHARCHITECTU~LCONCRETE | | | | 1 UGHT.... SMOOTH ARCH'ECTURAL CONCRETE 1 14 11 11 4 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 n 11 11 &P1 (A) 11 11 B 11 11 11 11 1 L _--Il lr 11 11 a. 9 1 T.CONCRETE ------------- 41 {1 *=a..4---------------------- ---------___-_-7-1-hEASTELEVATION -r i L-J | | L-J ~ SCALE : 1/4Â» = 1'-0" 0 . 2. /; GFRC CONCRETEE STONE VENEER PAhELS 31 - + T.PARAPETT ELEV: 12241#. 1 T.PARAITT /UN:,2741/ , ./PLI / CONCRETE W~4IDOW + 1 9,1.; L....: T.PLY ..15 +.-ov N CASING T.PLY ELEV: 121-1 T.PLY ELEV: 11'll ELEM: 1./ I I STOREFRONT WINDOWS- > ~ -t21 k ..f I[ElTE/- -3-g- '4,).14, W m E A1 tt Cf -91 - ' *S .NTRUCT ELEV: 105-3- 6 e STEEL WINDOI en 444,4. C, - 1 SYSTE' '391â‚¬RDE SOFFITIOBEgll. Â·y,â€¢.41!r 7., 6 . CONCRETEPANELS - ~.r, "Â·6'29- iÂ·.- #'.R'j I. : 00 - 4 M 8.STRUCTURE ELEV: 1,0-5. T.PLY ELEV: 19/ REV 00-20 Dacember 2010 - 0 = LE~~ - REV 30-5 Ne,ambe, 2010 4.1 -f SMOOTH ARCHITECTURAL .41 r* r: CONCRETE --*An.-lei I t . 1/4 +.i.. Â·.L'"2 '22* Em: 100.a- N 1*443UKÂ· ' B-:91 4-40 EXTERK>R PAVING DO-5 a--, 20 0 1- 1 - t . J P L EXISTINGRNISHGRADE 1 1 1 1 T.CONCRETE T.CONCRETE ev. ate: 11 JE"â€ž/1 2011 1 ' t----d L struciD, 00 DATE 0000 ELM: 98'/ ELEV: 98'4 I r da. TI,le: 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 1 11 ELEVATIONS !1 1 1 '_ 1 ' Sheett 11 / 11 1 1 21 1 111 (Ub'11 ~ 119 11 11 I jah 11 11 11 1 11 11 1 8 d LL====22 11 11 A3.1 11 I. 1 1 1 1 T.CONCRETE /2)SOUTH ELEVATION r'-r-----TL T CONCRER ELEV: 87-1,Â· (31 SOUTH ELEVATION OF GLASS SYSTEM + ELEV: 87'-1 1 L_J L_J L_J j SCALE : 1/4" = 1'4" ~ SCALE : 1/4' = 1'-0" .'M.*Sil./1. 013113)41.040!.AdCD OnlON, Sl,â€¢ID. 03Ak,363UU3,40 /1Â¥ a Aaolful s MÂ¥ i Norlitilloo ; iv Nr,1=,~ 1~VHE 0'u S.LO,l,HOB' 010[us 0'd 6103 01've OnlS *) NOIS 83.~1131.nHMI,01/~13HlinekLIMO dOOUO,]3SOIA*NO,1./0, 9141 01%10,4 Â·0..gl ....CWUS do.WA.low.19141 Sll */000.1.03 Â¥/001NaIN N9!S al INV N ...0, 3,11 3.............9 'll 32:I NI13I/\IBBH ...... 4Â£1,/ 77.1....,0 . . 0 0 . . . . . CITY OF ASPEN IMPROVEMENT SURVEY ~ 16.00' A PART OF LOT 3, BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDITION -8- LOT 7, BLOCK 1, PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION LOT 8, BLOCK 1, PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION A PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 0 5 10 20 1" = 10' l ~ NOTES ' CONCRETE HATCHING DENOTES DRIVEWAY ENCROACHMENT , 875.06,00'E O,81 AREA OF DRIVEWAY 1) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 9 PARCEL A: 0.8' LOT 3, BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDITION, EXCEPTING FROM SAID LOT 3, THE SOUTHERLY 15 PROMONTORY SUB. ~ /* * SET 3,0' FEET. LOT 7 WIT. COR. PROMONTORY SUB. 9' A PORTION OF LOT 7, BLOCK 1 PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT PARCEL B: A5' pr RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO, 105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A AT PAGE 240 OF THE RECORDS BURRES PARCEL â€¢i DLy DLB' -~DLB' DUADLS' QI-12 P10" FOR PITKIN COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: DL7' BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 8 SAID PROMONTORY 5405 SUBDIVISION BEARS N75'06'W 3.61 FEET; P12"*E / THENCE S75'06'E 46 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE N17'45'E 40 FEET; - 4 DL8'~/ * THENCE N75'06'W 16 FEET; ./ 0 THENCE IN A SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY COURSE ON A STRAIGHT LINE TO THE POINT OF .06 BEGINNING. ---1440 8746,00"E PARCEL "B" 43 0 ..tv. 0 PARCEL C: 2* A PORTION OF LOT 8, BLOCK 1 PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION, WHICH SUBDIVISION PLAT IS 144 20 64' 6 0 --- 7 FOR PITKIN COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: CO * RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 105731 IN DITCH BOOK 2A AT PAGE 240 OF THE RECORDS (17.03' REC 1951-- eÂ· - CDT 3, BLK 7 ---- --I /. 20,92 FEET; BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8 BEARS N17'45'E RIVERSIDE ADD, ~ ~' plg" 1 , THENCE N17'45'E 20.92 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8, WHICH IS ALSO THE PARCEL Â»A" -- ---- 1 i j i DL9' ,,/f SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7, SAID BLOCK 1; --607. 7 THENCE N75*06'W 49.61 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; 1::/ 1 PB" C /44 407-3---* C THENCE S24'06'W TO A POINT 15 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 3, DLB' \ i BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDITION; THENCE N24'37'E TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 4 THENCE S75'06'E TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 8; HOBGOOD PARCEL , J 'Â·2 O,9 PARCEL"C" * i 2) BASIS OF BEARING: +u 0 l 2 STORY * A BEARING OF S24'37'00"W BETWEEN A FOUND REBAR AND YPC LS# 2376 AT THE S.E. / A SINGLE FAMILY 7. S ~0 3 0 0 KÂ¢ RESIDENCE 40 03 PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 2 MARGARET MEADOWS SUBDIVISION. -0 4 i PROPERTY CORNER AND A FOUND REBAR AND YPC LS# 2376 ALONG THE EASTERLY O 2% 5 , 3 - - A/" rn ' / b 1--0 N . 3) THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY THIS SURVEYOR. TITLE 27 - 0 0 FF=7952.34 7 0 INFORMATION RELIED UPON FOR THE PREPARATION OF THIS SURVEY FURNISHED BY DLEV \ / 0, 2.a STEWART TITLE, ORDER NO. 42962, DATED 10/14/2004 . / ~ 4 / GRAVEL 4) ELEVATIONS BASED UPON GPS MONUMENT NO.1. BENCHMARK= 7954.37' AT S.E. .Â© 1 2 0 DL13', 1 2 1/ / m 4 DRIVEWAY L . If i k PROPERTY CORNER. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 1(ONE) FOOT. 1 '1 1 1 71, / 2 5) NATURAL HAZARDS: A: ACCORDING TO FIRM MAP 08097C0203, PANEL 203 OF 325, DATED JUNE 4, 1987, â‚¬? 1 1 1 3/ 4,0 / SAID LOT IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN ZONE X AND OUTSIDE THE 500 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN. - -7952-- U B: ACCORDING TO THE 2001 SURFACE DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN, SAID LOT IS CONSIDERED A5 DL/' 4 -t-- f Ft (r \ - 4 b C: ACCORD/NG TO THE 2009 PERCENT SLOPE MAP, SAID LOT IS SHOWN TO HAVE SLOPES 0 0 / / TO BE OUTSIDE THE MUDFLOW HAZARD AREA. 0 \ \\ (4 748 ' LESS THAN 10% OCK WALL FRONT YARD: 10.0' RES, 30.0' / 6) CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING RESTRICTIONS: WOOD \ SETBACK RESTRICTIONS: R-6 ZONE DISTRICT REGULATIONS. #5 REBAR DECK \ / SIDE YARDS: 5.0' \X\.Ft .V / 6. REAR YARD: 10.0' NO CAP 7 TOTAL AREA=5,322 SQ.FT.* ROCK ~ 6 2 0 9 Â»h / f) 3/* p. 1 N75'06'00"W R /6 DL7' 15.0' , 004.-. 4 / 4 (5~8" Ypt I I - 2499 1,14 c,2 DL6 LS# 2376_ / ~ C LEGEND SHADOW .714 0 < 66.16' LS# 2376 & 1 + YPC 2 , Â· BENCHMARK 1 INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED. 7954.37' ~ 1\ dy 0 8 INDICATES SET MONUMENT LS# 37972 S83'11'21"W 4, / 1362.38' 4- YPC YELLOW PLASTIC CAP CITY OF ASPEN <~'~ ~ GPS MONUMENT -1 (-Cb POWER POLE 0 0 Â¤ FENCE LINE SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE e NO. 1 m * LIGHT POLE -OU- OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE \ 2 1, MICHAEL P. LAFFERTY, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP ACCURATELY DEPICTS AN 04 ~ ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER EM ELECTRIC METER IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT PERFORMED UNDER MY SUPERVISION ON 10/2008 AND VICINITY MAP 1"=400' LOT 2 0- 4 REVISED 7/2010 OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND. THE LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL IMPROVEMENTS, EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN EVIDENCE OR * \<~*7, E MARGARET MEADOW SUB. 0 TELEPHONE RISER ASPEN TREE KNOWN TO ME AND ENCROACHMENTS BY OR ON THESE PREMISES ARE ACCURATELY e O SHOWN. ERROR OF CLOSURE IS LESS THAN 1/10,000. Â© CABLE RISER ~ PINE TREE B B E 0.H. OVERHANG TYPICAL D9" (DECIDUOUS 9 INCH DIAMETER TRUNK) WATER VALVE P6" (PINE 6 INCH DIAMETER TRUNK) ~ Ob E DL8' (DRIP LINE 8 FEET) oty:424 o MICHAEL P. LAFFERTY PLS. # 37972 0 DATE: 'ld-37972'~ ~ 4 SLOPE ANALYSIS % -~(ddJ .llEo â‚¬ a 0 8 YPC - SLOPES 30% TO 40% A--LL Rocky Mountain Surveying DATE SURVEYED: 10/2008 LS# 2376 1=1 rli#...il~ 0 ~ 17 REVISED: 7/2010 6-Â£7-87E-~ /419 ~ FILE NO: 08548 a CLIENT: HERMELIN * 4133 crystal springs rd \\ carbondale co 81623 NOTICE: According to Colorado law you must commence any legal action based phone 970-379-1919 upon any defect in this survey within three years after you first discover such defect. fax 970-9634873 In no event may any action based upon any defect in this survey be commenced more \/Am M..=N / / /\\ -Dr--L_ ~L - laff@sopris.net than ten years from the date of the certification shown hereon. ....... â€¢ 0 E 14\\MA 501 Rio Grande Place Suite 104 t Aspen, CO 81611 STUDIO B Phone: 970.920.9428 architects Fax: 970.920.7822 Summary Letter Project: Hermelin Residence Date: 1-26-11 Contact: Joseph Spears (Studio B Architects) Time: CC: Location: 131 Midland Ave We are requesting a variance form: Section 26.410.040(C)(2)(b) - The front fagade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street then the front-most wall of the house. Based on the attached diagram it is clear to us that the design guidelines, in this case, do not help protect the pedestrian and neighborhood experience. The constraints on this site and the guidelines actually force the garage to be located as a central and predominant element to the house along with the driveway. Allowing the garage closer to the front-most fagade would allow the garage to be located more to the side and screened by existing trees. This would allow a more predominant front door entrance and porch area instead of driveway and garage. We also took a look at the other homes along Midland and many houses have garages that also don't conform to the guidelines. Many lots in the east-end have irregular shapes, which has attributed to the neighborhood less organized layouts. This lot is no exception. Refer to Diagram 1 Existing neighborhood photos Section 26.410.040(D)(2) -- First story element. All residential buildings shall have a first-story street facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty (20) percent of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first- story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first-story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (Whether it is a deck, porch, or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element, however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front fagade shall not be precluded. We feel that we have addressed the first-story element by create a recessed entry porch, which comprises 25% of the buildings overall width. The recessed porch is 6' deep. It is our understanding that this requirement is in place to keep residential structures from being a two-story fa~ade without relating to the scale of the different levels of the building. We have addressed this very well by extending the second level over the first-story creating a clear visual break that, brings down the scale of the house, and enhances the viewers perception of two visible one-story .. elements that relate to the pedestrian scale. To meet the grade challenges on the site we have dropped the recessed porch by 14" below the driveway level. Therefore, the first-story plate height appears from the front elevations to be 9' 6" but from the recessed porch is 10'9". In order to meet the guideline that requires that there be no enclosed area over the first-story element, we would need to remove a significant portion of the second level and with the tightness of the site would make it un-functional. We did try to extend a canopy out from the recessed porch, however due to the tightness of the site we have located the front of the building directly on the front setback. In order to create any usable backyard and this limits the canopy to 10". Refer to Elevations / Physical Model Existing neighborhood photos .. ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM project: tter A. 5 6'A. fer,U. 4Â£27 Applicant: Ref. s*,-20 6 .,&4/;Ae,2< Location: ,31 "11.olland Ad t.. A.,pe,k , 6, 21(ptl Zone District: R- 6 Lot Size: Lot Area: E; 321 =F (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition ofLot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: '~A Proposed: '*A Number ofresidential units: Existing: 1 Proposed: I Number of bedrooms: Existing: 3 Proposed: 4/ Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): ~~ DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: 2,4 27 Allowable: 2,1 /Z Proposed:_2,251 Principal bldg.height Existing: 23 ' Allowable: 26' Proposed: 24I Access. bldg. height: Existing.Â· - Allowable: - Proposed: - On-Site parking: Existing: 2- Required: 2. Proposed: 2. % Site coverage: Existing: 27 X Required: - Proposed: 33% % Open Space: Existing: Required: - Proposed: - Front Setback. Existing: 3'40 Required: /0' Proposed: /0' Rear Setback: Existing: L 1 ' Required: /D ' Proposed: /D ' Combined F/R: Existing: - Required: - Proposed: - Side Setback. Existing: 4' /00 Required: 6~' Proposed: 6 ' Side Setback. Existing: /5-' Required: 7 ' Proposed: 7' 7" Combined Sides: Existing.- Required: Proposed: Distance Between Existing Required: Proposed: Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: S â€¢â‚¬Â»2~Â·;D,L- 26.4!0. 040 64) (23(63 Sect:AL 2.6. 410. 040 ( D) C 73 .. Â» CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Aff,Â·eement for Pavment of Citv o f .Aspen Development Application Fees /4 CITY OF ASPEN (licreinafter Cll'Y) atid =I-ars'e.,A_ Spurs C Â·sÂ·\Â·~ L arclti J.JO (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: ' 1. APPLICANT lins submitted to CITY an application for He,râ€¢ze-1:*- fre *t,l.#r-e_ (liereinafter, TIIE PROJECT). 2. A PPLICANT understands mid agrees that the City of Aspen has an adopted fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is n condition precedent to a determination of application coinpleteness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the Size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at t Iii s tinie to ascertain the full extent of the costs invoked in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPI,ICANT make payment of ati initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on it monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity mid will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they arc necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its filll costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or ])resent sufficient inforniation to the Historic Preservation Commission, Plaiining lind Zoning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Historic PresenÂ·ation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission mid/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless cil!-rtnt billings are paid iii full prior to decision. 5. Therclore, APPLICANT agrees that iii consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completcness, APPLICANT shall pay mi initial deposit iii the aniOLInt 0 S P/,72>. B ,;hich is for G how-s of Community Development stall time, mid if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reiniburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of S245.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be nitidc within 30 days oftlie billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that faihire to pay such accrued costs sliall be grounds for slispension of processing, mid in no case will bitilding pennits be issued until all costs associated with ease processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT m: -JBsgA. Fea,3- Celuel,9 6 amud<)4> Chris Bendon Communit> Development DllÂ·ector Date: li /1440 Billing Address ind Telephone Number: , Buoe- + irt~ 4. 'lerâ€¢â€¢1 k. 3 2 t er (r,,9 6"t g DO B#Al kn- F. tai , Al:[ 480~205- .. ATTACHMENT 2-LAND USE APPLICATION PRO.lEa: Name: Mer**el,k Resittenct Locatioir 131 vnial#NIA A.w. A.*el, CÂ© 2,6Â»ll (Indicate street address. lot & block number, legal desfription where appropriate) Parcel ID#(REQUIRED\ 2.137 1 9 1 6 706-7 APPLICANT: Naine: Stt- r. Qre..:Jer I,kr,+1 e.i;.t Addiess: 3210â‚¬ &}.719#M R.1. 8.'0140-- Fh,ni r 01:C 48015' Phoiie #: 24%- 5410 - 31 2-0 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: 5444 6 1 /1 ./ Address: EM Kh> GrÂ«.t,tc plÂ«ce- 14\-e- 1(04 *fe,U '0 3411 Phone #: 770 -9 20 - 942 F TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): GMQS Exemption D Conceptual PUD El Temporary Use GMQS Allotment U Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) E Text/Map Amendment Special Review D Subdivision U Conceptual SPA ESA - 8040 Greetiline, Stream j Subdivision Exemption (includes U Final SPA (& SPA Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, c o il d o n l ii i i u 111 i za t i 011 ) Ainelidnieiit) Motintaili View Plane U Commercial Design Review U Lot Split D Small Lodge Conversion/ ~,0' Residential Design Variance U Lot Line Adjustment D other: [3 Conditional Use EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description ofexisting buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) Scraf aâ€¢o{ re.plicâ‚¬- ex,91-:0. houre- c e,c:,fw.,1 st'.,k -fam,ly hom c. 44- 2.7 z'/ 7,44 PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, lists, modifications, etc.) CO,14.Uj- GL nitt.; :rtl,lt 4.0.;4 12.extolenct qk % 780 1,k Have yon attached the following? FEES DUF: S ,14 *D ,2t"Pre-Application Conference Summary U Attachment #1, Signed Fee AgiÂ·cement U Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form U Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards U 3-D Model for large project All pMns thnt are lArger' than 8.5" X ll" must be fuhled, A disk â€žith ail eleclrie copy of :ill written text (1[ierosoft Word Format) must be submilted as par, 01'the :Ippliention. Lai'gescale projects slionld include an cleetronie 3-I) 1110(le]. Your pre-application con terence fit :iiiii:i i,v nill indiente ifyoti nins{ submit a 3-D model, 0000 .. ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: 642**1211'A Re~Â·Jines- Applicant: Re/. <Au.18 6 4 /Â£4 /'+t-,05 Location: UM ,#*WAL.J A-#e. Affâ‚¬,1, O.> 2ll,U Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition ofLot Area iii the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existbig: 4~ 6 proposed: 4/5 Nilinber of residential units: Existhie, Proposed: 1 Number ofbedrooms: E.\isting.' 3 Proposed: 9 Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): 446 DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: 242.7 Allowable: */29 Proposed: z.723 t 8 Principal bldg. height: Existing: 23 ' Allowable: 25 ' proposed:_23 Access. bldg. height: Eristing: # Allowable: / Proposed: / On-Site parking: Existing: 2. Required, 2- Proposed: Z. %Site coverage: Existing: 27% Required: - Proposed: _~*~BL % Open Space: E.risting: - Required. - Proposed: - Front Setback: Existing: 2 ' 4' Required: 16' Proposed: 122 11 Rear Setback: Existing: 2/ ' Required. 16 ' Proposed: 20 ' 7 4 Combined FIR: Existing: - Required: - Proposed: - Side Setback: Existing: 4'/00 Re(wired: 6 Proposed: 0 w , 11. 41 Side Setback. Existing: 15 ' Required: 5 ' proposed: 5'6" Combined Sides: Existing.Â· Reqi,irecl: Proposed: Distance Between Existing Reqti i red: Proposed: Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: re.Re~ C. Uarze.*Ce. 4-,0,â€¢L ~Colk#1- Z.G. 4(0 .040 (2'CÂ© C 6> yarv e. . 6.-1,1 /O' 6.04.- trevw. p-t - ,..sl- watt efevoutier. 1,'ll 27 10 11:068 p.1 .. 501 Rio Grande Place Suite*104 Aspen, CO 81611 STUDIO B Phone: 970.920.9428 architects Fax: 970,920.7822 Autho,ized FABesei,latne Project Herrnelin Residence Date: 10-27-10 To: Jennifer Phelan (Community Locatiard 131 Midland Ave. Development) Aspen Colorado, 81611 Brian and Jennifer Hermelin, whose address is 131 Midland Ave. Aspen,Â· Colorado 81611, *e authorization for Studio B Archltects, whose address is 501 Rb Gmnde Mace ;spen, Coforado 81611, to act as {heir representative through the process of applying for a vari ance from The Aspen Residential Design Standards Section 26.4.410.040Â©(2)(b). I (3/Ze-t~k-Â·-Â»2_2 Brian Hermelin , Date: 10 LA 910 Jertrlife?~~~elin Date: .N\rÂ«__-_ak (0(14(10 Studio B Architects Date: . .. - .ALTA OWNER'S ]9)1.10' - 10-17-92 POLICY OF TITLE INSIJRANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, TI]E EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B AND THE CONDITIONS AND ST]PULATIONS, STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas corporation, herein called the Company, insures. as of Date of Policy showin in Schedule A, against loss or damage. not exceeding the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedule A, sustained or incurred by the insured by reason of: 1. Title to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested Other than as slated therein; 1 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title: 3. Unmarketability of the title; 4. Lack of a right of access to and from tile land, The Conipany will also pay the costs, attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in defense of the title, as insured, but only to the extent provided in the Conditions and Stipulations. IN W]TNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused this policy to be signed and sealed by its duly authorized officers its oft]:c Date of Policy shown in Schedulc A. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY < 2 7 9 /fle,LE'.iâ‚¬49, '29-lix#(1 loitu / 1, . 4-42,20(,gl31 101420 thâ€¢irme, or tlitoo.H / w:\ -7,- 0: 1 1 /< C 51, 1 9 0 8 .,Â·91 b.taâ€¢it VItalog-/ Countersigned: A zithorized Cozinterilgiiatirfe--2**4*6437Â¢- -1 Stewarl Title of Aspen, Inc 620 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (970] 925Â·3577 EXCLIJSIONS FROM COVERAGE Tile followÂ·Ing mucters :irc e,pressiy excluded from the coverage of this pollcy and the Company will nol pay loss or dumage, ensts, attorneys' fces Or eXpense, 4Â·ch Grise by reason of 1 (a) An>' lav., ordinance or Voi'eminental regulotion (:retuding but not linnted to building and zoning laws, ordinanees, or legulations) refulcting, regulating. prohibi[Ing or relating to {1) the occupancy, unc, or enjoyment of Ike loni, (11) the choroeter. diniensions or location of any iniproven:ent nuw or hereafter creckd on the land; fill) 3 scp,ration in ouncrship or a chinge in the dimenstons or area of thc land of any parcel of Lihich Ike land is or was 2 pait, 1 or (i v) e 115 it onmental pretection, or the effect ef ony #Â·101.o tion of iheie 13Â·0,Â·4, ordin ancts or govemmental regu 'aliens, e ,-eept to the extent that a notice U the E enforcement the,Â·col'or a notice of a defe:[, Imn or en:unibrance reÂ£ulting from a vinlation or alleged violotion offuting thie land has bccn re:n,ded in ihe pubhe re:ords at Dile of Vulic, (b) Any gmemmental puke pm, cr not e,cluded tly (al) above, e.%.cept to the ertent that a notice ul che ex crcile Ihercof or a notice of 3 defrel, litn or cneumbrance resulling from 3 violation or alleged â€žulation affecting the land bps been recorded in tile public ic:ord, 2 1 Date of Policy 2 Rights of eminent dorruin utiless notice of the exere ic: thereof has been recorded in 'he public recor ds 31 1)3 te or Poh cy. but r.lit excluding from er.,erage any taking ultich his occurred prlor to Date of Policy *high uould be binding on the vight& of o pur:h.wr fer , alite Without knowledge .7 Defects, liens. incumbrances, adier,se clairlis or othcr matterÂ·- 1 a) creitcd. suffered, a,kumed or agreed to by the infured chimunt, tb) not knewn to the Ce;,Â·pany, nul lee{,rded m the public re:ads at Dale of Pe 0, bul knonn lo the Insured e 1 jitiÂ·,itil and not Jise Iiiscd in KT,ling to Ihe Company by the Insured cla:mant pner to The dakÂ· 11:c insured claimint be:2111: an insured under thi, polie>, (I) rebulting in no !01 or damage to [h: insured :]winiant. 11) allaching or G gated subsequent to Date of Policj, or den resultine m los, or damage which v,r,uld nel bive been subl:Nied 11' thÂ·: inhured ciaimint had paid ialue for the eitate u, IntereÂ·<11Â·nured bi this policy Serial No, O-9701-359407 1Â», 1 01 4 Al LA (;WhiR'S 701 !( Y 1(.Â·1?-92 ' .' 1. .Â· F-' . .. 4. Any cliint, aÂ·hich artics oul of tle tran<acticti vesting in r}ic Insured the 151ate or :,1!crest m.ured hy Ihis polic>Â·. by reastin of the Operution of frdcra] hinkruptey, state rnsolvency. or Similar crediturs' fights laws, that is based crl: (al) the tion,uction cre,ting the estorc or interest msurcd by this policy btnnit decmcd a fraudulent conve>ince â€žr it Judulent transfer. or , 1 (b) the trans:action ircating the citate nr mierest insured by this policy being deemed a pre ferent,31 transfer c.,cept where the preferenlial trans fur refulls from ilte faili,reÂ· (i) to linlely record (he instiuinent of [ranster: or fii) of such reccr,lation t., import notice 10 3 purehiser f-or value cr a judgtixnt ur 11:n creditor. CONDITIONS AND STIPUI,ATIONS L DEFINITION OFTERMS. Ille following tÂ¢rms when used in Ihis policy mean. (a) "insured": the inwred named in Schedule A, and, subject to any rights or defenses the Corrpany would have lid against the nanted insured. ihose : vho succeed to the intacit ofthen.med insured by operatinn of law as distinguished from purchose including,but nol limited to,heirs, distribulces, devisks, 1 survivors, personal repreientalives, next of kin, cr corporate or fiduciary successors (b) "insured elaimant": 211 insured claiming Ims or damige, (c) "knowledge" or "known": actual knowledge. no{ construclive knowledge or notice which inay be imputed to on insured by rea;on of [he public i : rect,rds 25 defined in IIi 8 policy or ony ntlier records which impart con,tructive notice r. f nialleÂ·rs a Acting the 11 n d. (d) "lund" the land described or referred to in Schedule A. and in,provements o flked thcrcto which by law consmute real properly. 'fhe lerm "land" docs not include uny properly beyond Ihe lines of the arn Jeiribed or referred lu in Schedule [A][C], nor any right, title, interest, ernie or easement in abut ing itreers, roods. avenues, alleys. bnes, u>N or waterwÂ·a>Â·s, but nothing herein 511311 modify or limit the excent to which a light of acc ess lo and from Ihe land is insured by this policy. Ce) ' 'moiltage" inortgage, deed of trust, trust decd, or wher security instrument. (f) 'bublie records": records cstiblished under State statutes al Dule l, f Policy for ihe purpose of impaning constructive notice of matters relating to real property (0 purchasers for valucind without knonledge. With mpect lo Seclion HaKiv) ofthc Exclusions From Coverage,"public records" shall atio include environmental prolection lien: filed m the records of [hc clefk of the Citited Stotes distn'el court fur Ihe district in which the land is leatcd. (g) "unmarkembility of the title" 012 allegcd or appirent rn,(rer affecti,ig the title to thc land, not excluded or excepted from co,crage, which nould entitle a purchager of the estate cr interest described in Scheduk A to be released from the obtigation to purchase by ,Â·irlue of a contract'u31 condition requiring the delivery of markebble title, i 2.('ON'l']Nl'ATION O F INS li RANCE A FIER CONVEYANCE OF TITI,E. Ilic covciagc of thi5 ]*Ilicy shall continue in force as of Date of Policy in favor of 21 insured only so long of the insured retains an estate or interew in the lind, or holds in indobtancis :ecured by g purchise money m.ortgage zipÂ·en by a purchi K r from the insured, or only so Icng ts the insured shall have liability by reason of covenants ofwitranty made by the Insured In iny trans fer or cornÂ·eyance of the Â£6!alc or interest, '1-his policy shall not continue in forcu m favor of gny purchaser from the insured ofeither (i) or estate or interot in the land, or fii, an indcbtedness secured by a purchase money mortgage given to the insured. 4 3. NOTICE OF CLAIM TO BE Gn'EX BY INSURED CLAIMANT. 'Ihe insured shall notify the Company promptly in writing (1) in ease of any 11(tgation 03 5Ct forth m Section 402) belok, (11) In case knowledge shall 6 come to an insured hercunderof any claini of title cr interest Al:i:h is adverse lo the title to the CS(ate orifi[Cres[, uS insured,and uhieh nlight cause loss or damage for which the Conipony may be liable by urlue of this policy, or (iii) i f lit:c to the estate or interest, as insured. is rejected as unnurkelable. If prompt notice shall not be gwen lit the Company, then as to One insured all liability ofthe Company shall terminate uith regard to the nutter or nutters fur which prompt notice is required; provided. hov.ever. that failure to nolity the Company shall in no cose prejudice thc rights of any insured under this policy Ui)1 Â¢ 5S the Compony sh @11 be prejudiced by 112 failure und then only to the extent of the prejudice. 4. DEFENSE AND PROSECTTION OF ACHONS: DUTY OF iNSt'RED CI.Al MANT TO COOPERATE. (3) l.poll written request by ilic insured and suhject to the options con mined in Section 6 of lic;e Condition f ond Stip 11 tions, the Company, a [ its own cost and i,ilhout unreasonable delay, shall provide for the detense of' on in,ured in litigation in I,hieh any third party asserts a clairn adverse to the tille or interest 55 insurÂ¢d, but only as to those stated causes of action allesins a defect, lien or encumbrance or other matter insured against by this policy. The Company shall have the right lo select counsel of its choke (subjed to the right ofihc insured to object frr reasonable iouse) to reprcient thc infured as to - those Mated causes of action zn d shall not be liable for and will not pay the fees u f uny other counsel. The Company will nol pay any fees,costs or evpenses Incurred by the insured in [hu defense of those causes of 3ction whieli allege matters not insured igainst by this policy. 1 (b) Tnt Company sh all have the right, at i 15 own cost, to inslitute and prosecute any action or proceeding or to do ony other act which in its opinion may f be necessary of desimble to establish the litle to the estgt: or in:crest, 09 insure{!, or m prevent or reduce loss or Jam,ge to the insured. The Company miyuke uny apprepnate oclion under the temls of this policy, whether or not it shallbeliablc her:under, and shall not thereby concede liability or wai,c ony provision ~ of this polky. Ifthe Company shall exercise itq rights under Ihi5 paragraph, it shall do so diligently. (c) Whenever the Company shall have brought an action or interposed a defense as requiled or permitted by the prnvisions o f Ihis policy, the Company may pursue any litigation to final determination by a court of compelent junsdiclion and expressly rescrves the right, in its sole discrcticin, to gppeal from any adversejudgment or order. (d) 111 all case: ,#here this policy permits or requires the ConipGny M prosecute or provide far the defense of any action cr proceeding. the insured sholl Secure to the Corrpony tile right to 50 prolecute or provide dcfense in the action or procce 'ing, and all appeali thÂ¢rrin, ond permit (he Conipan> to use, nt itt option, [hc name of the insured for ihis purpose. Vihencier requested hythc Conipany, the insured, M the Company'S expense, shall glic the n,mpuny all i re,501Â·.able oid (i) in any action or procceding, se:uring eqdence, obtuining witnesses, prosecuting nr delending the action or preceding, or effecting Seltlen:ent, und (ii) in any other lawful act %,hich in the opinion of the ConÂ·.pony may be necessify or de:liable In establish the title to the estate or interest as insurcil. If Ihe Company is prejudiced by the foilure of the insiwed to furnish the required cooperotion. the Company's obligations to the insured under the po]Icy shall terminate, including any liability or obligation lo defend, profeeute, or (intillic any litigation, with regard to the matter or Initter., requiring such Â¢002:ral:07, Serial No. O-9701-359407 Poge 2 of 4 Al rA OWNER'S POLICY 10.17,92 -: I.*84--2./1.I#.*..Al'.....6 I. 1...2 .......m==-'-CÂ·=2el.$1.-IÂ·,7/tÂ£.I!â€¢I=â„¢i==1,/Ik*lier:-.Ir....r'/7//:I.-IP'll'll.pl.#/2/Il.el....::I.- 6='I=Irl'll-rl#..~I".-Il.'.I'.-VId-.I'/I'.I.e#..#IIj.'ll...m.*=I. - . JIUILa., ' , e . 5. PROOF OF 1.DNS (jit I).i#AGE. i in uddition lo and after the nuti:cs reguir:J under Se:tion 3 01 th'..c (-unditionb und St,pulatior,5 ha'.e b.i'n prouded th. Conipln), 7 proof .,1 loss er donlage slyned wid 5,1.orn to by tile lasuied elain:ant sh]I) be furnished ta the Compon> wihin 90 dw after the inÂ¢,wied clainni:it iha',1 0.:crt211, the rue:, gr.ing rist lo the In.s or danlier The prool of loss or dgm.ge sk.Â·dI] descnbe the derÂ¢:1 111, or Itcn Or cilect,brancr on (hc mic, or other waller insufed 2gat.n S l b>Â· this policy whic h coniumics {he basis of loss or Jamige and 51,3 11 state. to the Ment possible, the bi 5:3 of :alcul@ting the amount of- the 1035 0, damage h the Company i. prejudiced by the fuilurÂ¢ of the InsUred Chimant to Wor,J: the required proof of }oss or damage. 11: Con*iny's obligation; to the insured under the pollcy shall ternlinate, tncludlnp en> Imbility cr obligation lo defend, prosecute. or continue any 111]gallon, wÂ·ill'l repird to the n13(ter or nutter, requiring slich pIi],11'01 1,â€ž. or Jurrulre In addition, the insured elutnun t nuy redurniblyÂ· be iequired to suhmit m e Airnination undet â€¢,31}~ hy ali)Â· autlinnied i:presentans'e of Ihe Company and shall produce for eummation. Inspcction 2;11 coping, al buch rcasunable 11111=b ind place, 33 mi> he Jcsâ„¢natcd b)Â· any authori,ed repre,ent,Li.< of the Company, 211 tecords. books. ledgets, checks. conespondence and memorandâ€¢, whether bearing a date beft,rt: c, ufter D~le of Polic; , i,hich rcits,~n2blyperloin lo the loss or damage Further, if requested b> an> authorized Tepresent]In'e of Ille Company. the Insuled claimant 5ha ! I giant its permis5ion, in willing, for any authonzed repre5entetive of the Compan) to eumine, Inspect and copy all reeord., books, ledger:, Checks, conespondence and nrmount]0 m tile cusÂ»J> or control of a third party, which reaionahly pertam In the lost or damage. All In formation designated :s confidential by Ihe insured clairnmt provided to the Compan> pursu unt 10 (his Seel] on hhall nal be disdoced to others unless, in Ille reason3blc Judgment of the Compally, H is n ccessary In [14 04 inin Istr,tion of the claim. Fallure of the insured claimant lo submit lor eumin,tion linder oath. produce other reasonabl> requested infwmation or grant permisucn 111 secure reasonably nce<Â·5520 111 formation (rom Chird panics ac required in this parogr2ph shal] terminate any 11.bility of the Company under this paky 2% to IIiat claire 6. OPTIONS TO PAY OR OTHERWISE SETTI.E (1.Al.MS; TERMINATION OF LIABILITY. In case of a claim under this po Â©, the Compln>' sh 111 hive Lhe 1 91 !ix, Ing at]Jition 31 option. (a)'1'0 Pay orTcnder Pa>Â·nient ofthe Amount of Inwrance, D ) To pay or tender paynx Ill ot- (hc amou n t o f insuran ce under this policy togglher with any cosh. attorneys' fed ami expenses incuircd by the imured cla iman 1, Â·,Â·hich uere authcnied by the Coniran), up In the time of pu> mgm or tender i, f pa> men t and 41:h the Compan) 15 obligated to 1)a) 01) Upon Ihe exe,cisc by ihe Company of this oplion, all habilily and obligations to the ;nsured under this polic), olher [han to make the pa>,rent r.quircd, shall terminate, Includmg any liabilit> or obllgattilit to defend, prmccutc, or continue an> litigation, and the pulicy shill be surrendered to the Conip3ny for (Â·@neellation lb) To hy or Otherwile Settle With Partle; O ther th, n the Inittred or Will, Ibe Insu rid C M innln t. (1) toi Fay or otherwise settle with wher rmles for or in the name of on tnsured clanrunt any claw'n insured against under thus polic>, together with an:, costs, uttome>3' fees and e#pelhes Incurred by tile Insured claimant wilich were gutho:ized by the Company up to the time of payment and which the Company is obligated to pay; or (il} to pay or otherwise seltle Kith the insured chinianl the loss of damage prn,ided for under this Folicy, together with any cosh, allonieys' fet:i rind ekpenses Incuned by the insuled claiinint whic}i ikeic uuthorim] hy the ('ompany up m the time of payment and which the Conipany ts cbligated m Fa> Upon the excrenc by the Company of either of the options prouded for In paragraphs (bxt) or (,1), the Comp:Iny's obligations to the Insured under this policy for the claimed loss or dim,ge, other [han [he paymenis required to be made, 511111 te}olinate, 3ncluding ally liability or ohligation to defend. prosecute orcentinue gn}Â· litigition 7. DETERM INATION, EXTENT OF LIABILIn' AND COINSURANCE. This policy is a contract of mdernnity against actual mciletary loss or damage sustained or incurred by die insured claimant who has suffered loss or damage by reason 01'matters insured gpinst hy [his policy and only to the exteni herein desÂ¢nbed (a) The liability of the Cornpany under this policy chall r.ot exceed the Ic,st of (i) the Amouni of InsuIance stated in Schedule A, 06 (11 J tht: difference between the value of Ihc insured estute or intcrew 05 insured and lic value of the insured estate or intÂ¢TCH subject to the delecl. lien er cr,cumbiance insured against by this policy (b) In the c,Â·cil the Aniount of Insurance stated m Schedule A 01 (11 c [)3[e o 1 Poltch Is less lian 60 percent of the value of the insured estaic or in t 6Â·Â¢11 or the full consideration paid for the land, iphichever 15 kss, or Ifsubsequent to 11:e Date of Polic>Â· an improvcmen[ is ereeted en tlic I,nd which Increasa llc; v@luc of he insured cstatc Or interest by nt Icist 20 percent 03Â·cr th: Amount of insurance stated in Schedule A, ihen ihis Policy is subject to the following (1) where no subsequent improvement has been mide, 35 fo any pirtial loss, the Cort'pan> 51,311 only pay the loss pro GilÂ·3 m the prnportion that the amount of insurancc al Date of Poltcy bears to the towl,Â·alue of the insured cstalc or interest at Date of Poliey, or (li) v,here a hubscquent Impro,ement 12s been mal!Â¢, 23 to any part: 01 loss, the Compan> shall only Fly Ihe los, pro ra!3 in the proportion thol 1 20 percent of the Anicent o f Insur@rce <12[ed 1,1 Schedull: A bu $ to the sum nf thc Amount of Inst.!Unce 5[atcd m LiÂ·hedule A and the amount eipended for 11:e improÂ·.crnent llic provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to wo):15, altornt:ys' fues ar.d expenses for which the Compan>' is ],abb under Ihis polle>Â·, 2Ed 51)Â·411 only apply to th3 t pertion of any loss which efeceds, in the aggregate, 10 pcr: ent ofuke Anlount of Insurance 31:(ed in Schedule A (c) 11te Company u 111 piy only those COSt.~, attorne)5' fees and expenses Ineurrcd in accoidance with Sectlon 4 ti f thwbe Conditions ind S:!pulations 8. Al'FORTIONMENT, 11' the huid descr,bed in SehÂ¢Jule A consists of t.,1 or nio:e pBrcels Â·Ahtch are not used 25 @ linglf' 31:e, and a loss ts established affecting one or more of the parcels but not :11, the loss shat] be ccrnpulet] und settled on g pro rat] basis aS if the mnount of insuron:c undiÂ·r thi, policy was difided 1,1,1 rita as to the value on Dice ot-Policy of each separate pireel to lhe whole, erclusive ofany improuments mode subscquent to Dite of Policy. unless a liebility or Â·. a luc ha. otherifisc bern agreed Upon 25 10 72.Â·h Nrect b>Â· le Climpin>Â· und the injuicd at the lim: of Chc iscusnee of thi5 polie> and shown b> an expre.5 stitcment Or by an endorsemel:t allacked zo this policy Serial No. O-9701-359407 pailt 1 <,104 Al.TA OWNER'S POLICY !0-17-92 - .. i 1 I 9.1.IMITATION OF [.111)11.It i'. (a) If the Con-pony f.91.ihlishes the title, or ren:oves the alleged defect, hen or encumbiar:ce, Or c UNS the 12Â¢k of u nght of access In or from Ihc I,rd, or cures the claim of unmarkclgbility of title, 211 as insured, in a reasonably diligent manner by any metled, including Illigation und the completion of any appeals therefrom, it shall have fully performed its obligations with respect to that matter and shall not be liable for any luis er daniage caused thereby. (b) In the even{ of any litigation, including liligation by [he Compiny or with the Con.pany's consent, ilic Company shill hascno liability for loss or : dams 5 until there has teÂ¢,1 1 finjl determinition by a coon of compe[ent jurisdiction, untl disposition of 011 appeals therefrom, adveise to the title as insured. (c) The Conipony shall not be liable for log or danuge 10 Itly instired for liabilily voluntanly assumed by the insured in settling an>Â· claim or suit ; u.'thtlut the prior Twilten consent of the Company. 10. REDUCTION OF INSURANCE: REDUCTION OR TERM]NATION OF LIABILITY. Allpayments under this policy, except payments rn,de for costs,attorneys' 128 and expenses, shall reduce the atrount of the insurance pro tanto, n./ .-â€¢' I iI. LIAÂ£,1 611 1 NON-CU,MUL.ATIVE. h ]5 expresslyunderstood th:It (he amour,lof insur:nce under this pol,cy shall be reduced by any aniount the Conipany Inay pay untler uny rolicy insuring a nx)agage to uhich exception is taken in Schedule H or to which the insured hu agreed. auumed, or (Aken subject, or which 15 herc,ftÂ¢r Â¢,ecuted by an insured ind which is a charge or lien on the estate or inlorcit 2(scribed or teferred to in Schidule A, and the amount so paid shall be deemed a pa>Tnent under this policy to [he insured ouner. 12. PAYMENT OF LOSS, (a) Na pa>,nent shail be mode v.,[hout producing this policy fof cndoffement of the payment unless thc policy lias ken lost or d.itroycd, in which casc proot' of loss or des truc tion sh 21 I be fu mi5hed to thÂ¢ sa tisfuclion of thc Company, (bl When h ability and the atent of loss or damage has ken definitely fixed in accordance with thebc Conditions and Stipulations, the 1035 or dirruge shall bs payable uÂ·ithin 30 days thereafter, 13. SlIBROGATION ['PON PAYMENT OR SETTLEMENT (a) The Conipa ny's Right orSubrogâ€¢tion. Whenever Ihe Company shall hatÂ·e settled acd paid i claim under mis policy. 011 right of subiogalion shall veil in the Compuny unaffcoted by any act of the msured cloirnanl. The Compiny shall be subrogated lo and be entitled to oll rights and remedici which the insured (!aimant notild have had ofoinst anyperson or properly in respect lo the claim had this policy not been issued. If [cquested by the Comparly, 111: insured claimant shall flansfer 1,1 [lic ConÂ·panyall rights and remedies againslany person or properly necessaryin order lo perfect (his right of subrogatioli. 1-lic insured claimatit shall permit the Company to rue, comprornisc or Scltle in the nime of the injured cl,imant und to use the name ofthe insured claimant in any transection or litigation involving these right: or remedies. if & payment on account of a claim does not fully cover Ilic loss o f the injured claimant, the Compan>Â·shill be subropled lo these rightf or.d re m edies in the proportion, nhieh thc Company's paynlent bcors ta tha whole amount of the loss. If loss should rÂ¢51!It from any oct of the insured elain,ant, as stated above, thai oel shall not void this pulicy, hut Ihe Company, in that event, shull bc required to pay only that part of any losses insured against by this policy which shall exceed the inrent, if any, lost lo the Compnyby reason of the impairrncnt by the insured claimant of the Compgny's right of subrogation. (b) The Company's Rights Ag@inst Non-insured Obligors. 1-he Company's right of subrogation against non-insured obligors shall exist and shill include, without lirnitation, the rights of the insured to 1 indeinnitles. guamnties, other policies o l insurincc orbonds, notwillistanding any (emis orconditions cone ined in those i r struments which provide for Subnigatitin rights by reason n f this policy, 1,1. ARMTRATION. Unless prohibited by applicable liw, either the Company or the insured may demand arbitration pursuant to Ihc Title Insurance Arbitration Rules of the Amcrion Arbitration Association. Arbitrable nallers mjy include. but arc not limited to, ony controversy or claim between the Company and the insured arising out of or relating fo I his polic>Â·, any service ofthc Company in Connection with 1 ts isjuance or the breach ol a policy provision or other obligalion. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurnnee is Sl,000,000 or ICM shall lie aibitraled at the uptiun of either the Company or the insured. All orbitroble matlers when the Amount o[ !nsurance is in excess of S1.000.000 shall be arbitriled only v hen agreed to by both the Comiliny and Ihe insured. Arbiti lion pursuant to this polic>' and under {he Rules in effect on the date Ihe denund for erbitration is mode or, 01 the option of the Insured, the Rules in c Afect al Difc ti f Policy shall be binding Ullon the p:Flies. 1112 aword niay include 9(torneys' Res only if the laws of the sta:e in which the 1]nd is located pennit a court to , award atto:ncys' fbes to a prrvalling party. Judg,nent upon the ouard rendered by the Arbitratorfs} may be encered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. ' The law of the fill!& of the land shalt apply to an arbitration linder the l'ftle Insurnnee A,bitrution Rule# A copy or the Rules mly be obtained from the , C-onÂ·.pany upon request. 15. LIABILITY ].IMITED TO TH]S 1 '01. fa'; 1'01.10%' EX'rlt<E CONTRACT. Ca) This policy together with all endoiscments. i 1 any, allached hereto by the Company 15 Ihe entire policy and contract between the insured grld the ~ Company. In interpreting:nyprovision of this polky, lhi5 policy shall be construed 35 a whole. (b) Any claim of loss or dimige. whether or not 42sed on negligence, and uÂ·hlch :trises out of the 5[Mus of Ihe tille to the estte or i,itere51 covered hereby or hy any action asserting such claim, shall he remicted to this policy. (c) No omendmen[ of or entlcirstment ki this pi,licy can be mode except by a Miling endorsed licrcon orattiched hcrelosigned by cither thc President, a Vice President, the Secretary, an Assibtant Secretary, or ialida:ing ofticer or authorized signatoryofthe Company. 16. NEVER.Anli.ITY. h the c#cut :iny pnn'15:on of the policy is held invalid or uncn!-orceable under applicable law, the FolicyÂ· shall be deemed not to include that provision ind an other pro,Â·151 ons shall remain M full bee a n d effect . 17. NOTICES. WHER E SENT. All notices required to be given the Company and anymtement in wn{Ing required to be furnished the Company shall include the numberof [lits policy and shall L>: addressed to the Company ot P. O. Bor 2029 110.]slon, TX 77252-2029, Serial No. O-9701-359.Il)7 Pay: 4 of 4 AL-1-A OWNER'S POLICY IO-17-92 1 1 .. .. -.. ALTA OWNER'S POLICY SCHEDULE A Order Number: 42962 Policy No.: O-9701-359407 Date of Policy: October 14,2004 at 1:19 PM Amount of Insuronce: S].850.000.00 Premium: S2,429.00 1. Name of Insured: WHRJ3, LLC, a Michigan limited liability coinpany 2. Tile estate or interest in the land which is covered by this Policy is: Fee Siniple 3. Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: WHIU3. LLC, a Michigan limited liability company 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: See "Exhibit A" attached hereto STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY I . 0 ALTA OWNER'S POLICY SCHEDULE B Order Number; 42902 Policy No: O-9701-359407 This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorney's fees or expenses) which arise by reason of: 1. Rights or claims ofparties in possession, not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims ofcasenients, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in areas encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of tlie premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 6. Taxes and Assessments for the year 2004, not yet due and payable, and Sllbsequent years and any special assessments not yet certified on the tax rolls of Pitkin County. 7. Any vein or lode of quartz or other rock ill place bearing gold, silver cinnabar, lead, tin, copper or other valuable deposits claimed or known to exist March 23, 1885 and the right of the proprietor of any win or lodc of quartz or other rock in place bearing gold, silver, cinnabar, lead, tin, copper or other valuable deposits for the purpose of extracting and removing the ore from such vein or lode should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises, all as reseived in patent recorded June 17, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 246, 8. Restrictions that only single family dwellings and outbuildings pertaining thereto shall be constructed on these lots. No unpainted metal roofs and no unpainted metal siding will be permitted. No structure shall be placed on these lots which exceeds twenty feet in height, (chimneys excluded), measured vertically from the lowest point of intersection of said structure with the natural grade of the land, to the highest point of roofridge. No structure shall be placed within fi fteen feet from the East boundary of lot number nine (9) as set forth in deed recorded June 18, 1959 n Book 188 at Page 2. 9. Easements, rights of way and all matters as shown on Survey o f subject property recorded May 22, 1998 in Plat Book 45 at page 15 as Reception no. 417191. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY .. STG Index ofEndorscments to Policy STEWARTTITLE GUARANTY COMPANY INDEX OF ENDORSEMENTS TO POLICY COLORADO Agent File No.: 42962 Insured: WHRJ3, LLC, a Michigan limited liability company Policy No.: O-9701-359407 Policy Form: ALTA Owners Policy 10-17-92 Charge: $2,429.00 The Endorsements indicated below are attached to the above referenced Policy: ENDORSEMENT 110.1 Deletion of Standard Exceptions Charge $ 150.00 .. 501 Rio Grande Place Suite 104 t Aspen, CO 81611 STUDIO B Phone: 970.920.9428 architects Fax: 970.920.7822 Vicinity Map Project: Hermelin Residence Date: 11-15-10 Contact: Joseph Spears (Studio B Architects) Time: CC: Location: 131 Midland Ave Aspen Co 81611 Ni'DI , 0%*% Â· '1 '11 1 ~ .iÂ·Â·1/4 0 no ,1 I" Â· Â· e G-de .'..4. 0 0 Bal ./ 2 Fed , 80 9 2 Z EMa,n '.St~i , ,; 14,1 .A St f - Aspen( 4 '' 23%99 2 Aâ€¢* 42' ir G , - 0 I q 43- L / g. t, . 0 % '7 0 1:7- ,/La rl J~ ~*9 9- 1 E GULÂ· ECOO#Ave E Durant Ave 2 -it ..r*,;iPO./3 ~~ Eft' 4Â·.g P.â„¢ = I â€¢ . :; 1 4 0,0 P West.jew D r '0 '26- 300 -- i --7 1 :400- 22 6 4*> ' I * 45/'. 2 '.round'WI Ft, flcarn,94 64 .t. Ola F.0 1 i ' ovc . 90 .ic e 4- L~ 9. 91 i th. 0. e , A c i 9 0 S ynd St .. THE CITY oF ASPEN Land Use Application Determination of Completeness Date: November 22.2010 Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant. We have received your land use application and reviewed it for completeness. The case number and name assigned to this property is 0070.2010.ASLU - 131 Midland Ave. The planner assigned to this case is Claude Salter. J Your Land Use Application is incomplete: We found that the application needs additional items to be submitted for it to be deemed complete and for us to begin reviewing it. We need the following additional submission contents for you application: Please submit the aforementioned missing submission items so that we may begin reviewing your application. No review hearings will be scheduled until all ofthe submission contents listed above have been submitted and are to the satisfaction of the City of Aspen Planner reviewing the land use application. ~Your Land Use Application is complete: ' If there are not missing items listed above. then your application has been deemed complete to begin the land use review process. Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429-2759 if you have any questions. -)keup Li~ -Mnnifer Phe41*Deputy Director City of Aspen. Community Development Department For Office Use Only Qualifying Applications: Mineral Rights Notice Required SPA PUD COW()P Yes. No_14 Subdivision (creating more than 1 additional lot) GMQS Allotments Residential Affordable Housing Yes _ No ')Q Cominercial E.P.F. .. U424Â©112001 C:010.70 (0 ASUA ......................../1/1121'tal Elle Edit Record Navigate FQrm Reports Format Iab Belp 1@ @ IX I ,/ 4FB~i E 8 -3 delÂ· ~i N 4 , 4 0 @ 1 lump l i *Ii 01 - i9*4ic&-ar*/- !2â‚¬] ~31 -0.Ii@,3/3%09 91 i 1 g Rogting 5tatus ~ Feei |Fee 5ummarx FE Actions | Attachments Routing t!~story I Valuation |Arch/Eng ~Custom FRIds |Sub termits 4 I mr - ...M-I-- ... r ~ Permt typ~aslu ~ Aspen Land Use , Permit # 0070.2010.ASLU i Address 131 MIDLAND AVE Apt/5uite , City ASPEN State ~-~ Zip 81611 Permit InformaNon i Master permit Routing queue aslu07 Applied 11tl 8/2010 - Project Status pending Approved - ~ Description SCRAP AND REPLACE EXISTING HOUSE SINGLE FAMILY 2,924 SQ HOME AND Issued CONSTRUCT A NEW SFM RESIDENCE AT 4,700 SQ Â· Final 5ubmitted STUDIO B ARCHITECTS Clock ~AJEEJ-| Days ~ Expires 11/13/2011 â€¢ 5ubmitted via . .ENE Owner Last name HERMELIN First name BRIAN & JENNIFER 32205 BINGHAM RD BINGHAM FARMS MI 48025 Phone (248) 540-8720 Addess Applicant 0 Owner is applicaO E Contractor is applicant? 023 Last name STUDIO B ARCHITECTS First name Phone (970) 920-9428 Cust # 23032 Address 02* Lender 44 Last name First name 1 ~ Phone ()- Address ~ iL:r'{ it AL- ; Displays the permit lendets addess AspenGold [seivet) angelas 11 1 oil - ,:i cÂ»t lof 4 -- AMÂ» 3 l 4-10 - 00 4 9 9%~Ek *FAÂ·*- 2-1%3 5/ Cvp 49 j ~ -ON,-61 1- 1-00111-sar-6, -11 1 1 ..i ." .1~ I