Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.CU.200 Park Cir.A47-94 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: 06/20/94 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: 2737 074 -01 -004 A47 -94 STAFF MEMBER: ML PROJECT NAME: Smith Conditional Use for ADU & 8040 Greenline Project Address: 200 Park Circle Legal Address: Lot 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision APPLICANT: Robert and Glenda Smith Applicant Address: Box 3182, Aspen, CO 925 -3937 REPRESENTATIVE: Representative Address /Phone: Aspen, CO 81611 FEES: PLANNING $ 978 # APPS RECEIVED 5 ENGINEER $ 96 # PLATS RECEIVED 5 HOUSING $ ENV. HEALTH $ TOTAL $ 1074 TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF APPROVAL: 1 STEP: X 2 STEP: Q nn P &Z Meeting Date /lq WO PUBLIC HEARING: 41010 NO VV VESTED RIGHTS: 0, NO CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO DRC Meeting Date REFERRALS: City Attorney )( Parks Dept. School District J( City Engineer Bldg Inspector Rocky Mtn NatGas )( Housing Dir. Fire Marshal CDOT e X Aspen Water Holy Cross Clean Air Board City Electric Mtn. Bell Open Space Board Envir.Hlth. s X ACSD Other X Zoning Energy Center Other. DATE REFERRED: �yj INITIALS: - DUE: - 7/R FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED:IA/ . City Atty City Engineer Zoning Env. Health Housing Open Space Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Mary Lackner, Planner RE: Smith 8040 Greenline Review and Conditional Use for an Attached Accessory Dwelling Unit - Public Hearing DATE: July 19, 1994 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the Smith 8040 Greenline and Conditional Use for an approximately 1600 sq.ft. addition that includes a 700 sq.ft. attached accessory dwelling unit with conditions. This addition is proposed to be attached to an existing 2800 sq.ft. residence. APPLICANT: Bob and Glenda Smith. LOCATION: 200 Park Circle, Sunny Park North Subdivision Lot 5. ZONING: R -15A Moderate - Density Residential. APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests 8040 Greenline Review for an approximately 1600 sq.ft. addition to an existing residence. The applicant is also seeking Conditional Use approval to build a 700 sq.ft. accessory dwelling unit within this proposed addition. This unit is being provided voluntarily. The one bedroom accessory dwelling unit will be approximately 699 net livable sq.ft. and will be located above grade. This unit qualifies for a floor area bonus, pursuant to Section 24 -3 -101. The applicant submitted the application with the intent of obtaining an access easement from the County to cross the County owned Mascot Lode. Since this application was submitted on June 20th, the applicant has been unable to secure this easement. In fact, the County has indicated that they most likely will not grant an access easement to the applicant. Therefore, the applicant submitted an amendment to the application on June 30th that assumes the requested access easement will not be granted by the County. Both the original and amended application information, maps, and elevations are included as Exhibit "A ". REFERRAL COMMENTS: The following referral comments are attached to this memorandum: ACSD - Exhibit "B" Engineering Department - Exhibit "C" Housing Office - Exhibit "D" Parks Department - Exhibit "E" Water Department - Exhibit "F" STAFF COMMENTS: The Commission has the authority to review and approve development applications for Conditional Uses and 8040 Greenline review pursuant to the standards of Sections 24 -7 -304 and 24 -7 -503 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. Conditional Use Review A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located; and Response: The proposed dwelling unit has the potential to house local employees, which is in compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan and the underlying zone district. B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and Response: The accessory dwelling unit is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, which consists of medium density single family residences. The Siegel affordable housing project, which consists of three dwelling units, was built on a lot adjacent to this parcel. The unit will not be visible as a distinct unit from the exterior of the residence or garage. C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and Response: The accessory dwelling unit will be completely contained within the proposed addition. The location, size, and design permit the occupant of the ADU privacy from the main residence. The general design of the house is compatible with similar development in this area. A total of eight parking spaces are provided on -site (two within an attached garage), which is adequate for the main residence and the ADU. None of the parking spaces are directly visible from neighboring parcels. The proposed ADU will have an exterior stairway which will access the entrance. As per past P &Z concerns, a recommended condition of approval requires that the unit be identified on building permit plans as a separate dwelling unit requiring compliance with U.B.C. Chapter 35 for sound attenuation. The applicant has proposed a roof design that will shed snow away from the ADU's entrance. No significant impacts are anticipated. 2 D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; and Response: All public utilities are adequate and in place throughout the neighborhood and can accommodate the proposed addition and ADU. E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and Response: The applicant is voluntarily providing the ADU. It is not required for mitigation. The applicant must file the appropriate deed restrictions for resident occupancy, including a six month minimum lease. Proof of recordation must be forwarded to the Planning Office prior to issuance of any building permits. F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Community Plan and by all other applicable requirements of this chapter. Response: This use complies with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and all other applicable conditional use standards. 8040 Greenline Review The applicant received 8040 Greenline approval in 1986 when the existing house was approved for development. The applicant is required to obtain a new 8040 approval, since the previous approval did not contemplate this addition. The Planning and Zoning Commission has final authority on granting 8040 Greenline approvals. • 1. The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is suitable for development considering its slope, ground stability characteristics, including mine substance and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls and avalanche dangers. If the parcel is found to contain hazardous or toxic soils, the applicant shall stabilize and revegetate the soils, or where necessary, cause them to be removed from the site to a location acceptable to the city. Response: The site averages a 24% slope across the length of the lot. A Geophysical and Geotechnical Subsidence Investigation was prepared for this lot in 1986, for the original 8040 Greenline review. The location of the proposed addition is identified as a favorable area for development. The only portion of the property 3 3 which was not fully tested, the upper northeastern section, is not proposed for any development. This lot is not encumbered by the EPA superfund boundary. The applicant will need to meet the engineering and structural requirements of the May 1986 report by Western Engineers, Inc. 2. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion or have consequent effects on water pollution. Response: The applicant has proposed installing perforated drain tile to use as part of the drainage system. Staff does not believe their will be any significant affect on the natural watershed, drainage, soil erosion or water pollution as part of this proposed development. 3. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the air quality in the city. Response: The applicant's proposal does not have a significant impact on the air quality of the city. 4. The design and location of any proposed development, road, or trail is compatible with the terrain on the parcel on which the proposed development is to be located. Response: The amended addition will tie into the existing upper levels of the existing residence at about two feet higher than the existing residence. This slight increase in height enables the applicant to obtain greater views and solar exposure. This design and location is compatible with the natural terrain of the site. 5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. Response: The applicant has minimized grading as much as possible so as not to disturb the natural terrain. All disturbed areas are proposed to be revegetated with a native seed mix, potentilla, choke cherry, and other mature shrubs to provide a natural appearance. 6. The placement and clustering of structures will minimize the need for roads, limit cutting and grading, maintain open space, and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource. Response: The placement of the ADU, within the proposed addition, has been designed to be accessible from the main house or from the 4 l existing driveway. The best alternative would be to obtain the access easement across the Mascot Lode which would permit additional privacy to the occupants of the ADU, provide fire protection from above the residence, and to provide snow storage for the existing road above this parcel. Either alternative proposed by the applicant will not impact the scenic quality of lower Smuggler mountain. 7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. Response: It appears from the application materials that the proposed addition will bring the residence close to it's maximum allowed floor area of 4,648 sq.ft. (which includes the 250 sq.ft. bonus). The exact floor area has not been calculated because staff does not have the detailed drawings indicating the dimensions of the addition proposed below grade. Forty -seven percent of the addition's height will be no higher than the existing residence. The portion of the addition that will be higher than the existing residence is proposed to be approximately two feet taller. Staff believes the applicant has minimized the height and bulk of the building so that it will function well, yet not impact the open space character of the mountain. 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. Response: All utilities are presently serving the existing residence. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District and Aspen Water Department have indicated that they can serve the project, subject to additional tap fees and connection charges. 9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development, and said roads can be properly maintained. Response: Adequate roads are available to the house and are properly maintained. 10. Adequate ingress and egress is available to the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for fire protection and snow removal equipment. Response: Adequate ingress and egress is presently in place to the residence. The applicant and staff prefer that the upper road be used as the access point to the ADU, however the applicant is working with the County to obtain an easement. Should the upper access not be available, the single access will be adequate for snow removal and fire protection. 11. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area 5 Comprehensive Plan: Parks /Recreation /Open Space /Trails Plan map is dedicated for public use. Response: The 1986 8040 Greenline review for this parcel required a trail easement be dedicated generally along the Salvation Ditch. The easement was eliminated when the Siegel employee housing was approved in 1992 by the driveway to this project. Staff would like the applicant to provide this trail easement across the property as the Salvation Ditch is a primary trail corridor identified in the AACP. SUMMARY: The upper access across the Mascot Lode does not impact steep slopes, grading or filling of the site. This driveway would not create any visual scaring along the hillside since it follows a relatively flat bench. The applicant's original plan proposed this upper access so that there would be a one car garage provided with the ADU and additional privacy for the occupants of the ADU. It is for these reasons that staff supports the upper access if an easement can be obtained from the adjacent property owner. Staff can also support the applicant's proposal without the upper access road. In this alternative, the existing access road would be used and residents of the new unit would access the unit along a walkway next to the primary residence. The fundamental design difference between the two applications is the height of the proposed addition. The original application proposes a roof line at the peak of the garage to be two feet higher than the existing residence. The amended application proposes a roof line of two feet higher than the existing residence along the length of the proposed addition. Although the applicant has not received a final determination from the County regarding an access easement to the upper portion of his property, staff believes that either alternative meets the 8040 Greenline review requirements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends approval of the Smith 8040 Greenline and Conditional Use for an approximately 1600 sq.ft. addition that will contain a 700 net livable sq.ft. one bedroom accessory dwelling unit subject to the following conditions: 1. The owner shall submit appropriate deed restrictions to the Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Authority for approval. The accessory dwelling unit shall be deed restricted to resident occupancy with a minimum six month lease. Upon approval by the Housing Authority, the Owner shall record the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 2. Prior to issuance of any building permits, a copy of the recorded deed restriction for the accessory dwelling unit must be forwarded to the Planning Office. 6 1^ 3. The accessory dwelling unit shall be clearly identified as a separate dwelling unit on building permit plans and shall comply with U.B.C. Chapter 35 sound attenuation requirements. 4. During building permit plan review, the Zoning Enforcement Officer shall make the final determination that the unit meets the minimum size requirement of 300 sq.ft. net liveable as defined in the Housing Authority Guidelines. The accessory dwelling unit cannot be less than 300 sq.ft. 5. The kitchen within the accessory dwelling unit shall meet or exceed the Housing Authority Guidelines for the definition of a "kitchen." 6. The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan to be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 7. The applicant and staff shall reconfirm that a trail easement has been dedicated along the Salvation Ditch as it crosses this property. 8. The applicant shall comply with the engineering and structural requirements of the May 1986 "Geophysical and Geotechnical Subsidence Investigation for Lots 3 & 5 Sunny Park North Subdivision," prior to the issuance of any building permits. 9. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the 8040 Greenline and Conditional Use review for an approximately 1600 sq.ft. addition for Lot 5 of the Sunny Park North Subdivision, with the conditions recommended in the Planning Office memorandum dated July 19, 1994." Exhibits: Application Information with plans and elevations - Exhibit "A" ACSD - Exhibit "B" Engineering Department - Exhibit "C" Housing Office - Exhibit "D" Parks Department - Exhibit "E" Water Department - Exhibit "F" 7 1 Exhibit A TO: Mary Lackner Planning Department, City of Aspen From: Bob and Glenda Smith Box 3182 Aspen, Colorado 81612 303 - 925 -3937 Re: Conditional Use (A.D.U.) and 8040 Greenline Review Existing Residence on Smuggler Mountain Lot 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision Date: June 17, 1994 We wish to build an addition to our 2838 square foot 4 bedroom home. We will be representing ourselves during the review process. Enclosed please find proof of ownership; the signed fee agreement and a check for $1074.00; a list of property owners within 300 feet of our property; a current improvement survey; a vicinity map; a site plan, floor plans and elevations of the proposed addition; a statement regarding our easement request; and statements addressing the review standards for Land Use Code Sections 7 -304 Conditional Use Review, 5 -510 Accessory Dwelling Units, and 7 -503 8040 Greenline Review. The size of our proposed addition is considerably less than the allowable F.A.R. for our lot. We wish to add a recreation space for our three teenagers with an Accessory Dwelling Unit above it for possible rental to our construction employees or for our own use so we can rent our house when our children are ready for college. We have been employees in the city since 1970 - 22 years at Highlands and the last 2 years at Snowmass. We have also built or remodeled many houses in the city and the valley. In 1986 we spent $8000 and 12 months going through the approval process, including the 8040 Greenline review, which set the precedence for the construction in the area that followed. Our neighborhood has always been a high density area, although the duplex zoning was changed when Park Circle was added. Our door neighbor has recently built three employee units on his lot below his home and many other neighboring homes are duplexes and condos. We would like to designate almost half of our addition as an Accessory Dwelling Unit, accessible from the back of our lot, above our home, with an attached garage (also within the F.A.R. restrictions). We can build a driveway to meet city requirements, but we will need an easement from the county to access the paved cul -de -sac in order to do so. Although the road above our house is not an alley, we believe the access to our proposed A.D.U. can be justifiably considered rear access. Our lot slopes down from the road above, with the hulk of the construction well below it and facing away, from it toward Aspen Mountain. Only the garage door will front onto the road, not even the entrance door to the Unit. The land above nur lot was originally designated open space but is now in the process of being traded to Jim Auster. Ideally we would like a permanent easement for accessing a garage, but if not, we need a temporary easement in order to access our property during the construction of the addition. Finally, we would like to request vested rights approval for everything in the enclosed proposal. Thank you. Bob and Smith 4 Smith Conditional Use and 8040 Greenline Review June 17, 1994 LAND USE CODE SECTION 7 -304 REVIEW STANDARDS: DEVELOPMENT OF CONDITIONAL USE A. The proposed conditional use, a 700 square foot, one bedroom Accessory Dwelling Unit with an attached one -car garage, is consistent with the purposes and standards of the Aspen Area Conprehensive Plan. The zone district, R -15A, Moderate- Density - Residential, does allow duplexes as long as half of the duplex is restricted to affordable housing. B. The A.D.U. is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity. Three employee housing units have been built at the bottom of adjacent lot 7, in addition to the single family house on the same lot. There are several duplexes and condominiums in the neighborhood. Note that our list of adjacent property owners within 300 feet of our property contains 82. names. C. We do not believe that the location, size and design of the A.D.U. will have an adverse effect on visual impacts, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, parking or noise. As explained in more detail in item 7 of Section 7 -503, the height and the bulk of the addition is minimal and it's location behind the existing house greatly reduces it's visual impact. It is also important to note that we are proposing to build considerably less than the maximum F.A.R. the size of our lot would allow. We wish to be sensitive to our neighbors and do not want to adversely effect them in any way. We have always taken excellent care of our property and intend to continue to do so. There is already more than adequate parking on the existing gravel drive, as indicated on the site plan. There are now 8 parking spaces, including the double garage, that when filled still allow adequate passage to lot 3, which shares the drive with lot 5. The parking areas are not directly visible by any of our neighbors. With the addition, the main house will have 5 bedrooms. The City requires one parking space per bedroom, with the exception of Accessory Dwelling Units. D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the existing house and the Accessory Dwelling Unit. E. The approval for construction of the A.D.U. is requested in order to possibly be able to house employees of our construction company. F. The A.D.U. will comply with all the standards imposed upon it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all other 'applicable standards, including those of Section 5 -510, which have been addressed on a separate page. Smith Conditional Use and 8040 Greenline Review June 17, 1994 LAND USE CODE SECTION 7 -503 REVIEW STANDARDS: DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT TO 8040 GREENLINE 1. The parcel must be suitable for development considering its slope, ground stability, etc. In May 1986 a Geophysical and Geotechnical Subsidence Investigation was prepared by Western Engineers, Inc. and submitted to the City for the original 8040 Greenline Review. A copy of the map showing the test sites is attached. It shows that the portion of the site designated for the addition was included in the favorable report. The only area not fully tested is in the upper northeast section of the site where no changes will be made. All of the city's engineering and structural requirements were met and are on file with the City. The lot was never designated as part of the EPA Superfund site. You can refer to the Superfund map in the Environmental Health office for verification, per Mr. Dunlap. 2. The relatively small proposed development will not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, drainage, soil erosion or water pollution. Based on our experience with the existing house, there will be no problems with the drainage. The soil is sandy and percolates extremely well. Perforated drain tile will be installed to drain to daylight as per the existing house. 3. The proposed addition will not have an adverse affect on the air quality in the City. 4. The design and location of the addition is compatiable with the existing terrain. The existing house is built into the slope on several levels. The Nk it' addition will tie into the existing upper two levels with the proposed garage several feet above that, following the slope, as indicated on the enclosed elevations. Except for the small one -car garage, the addition will be the same height as the house is now. The addition will match the existing earthtone structure in style and finishes. We are very proud of the natural landscaping as it exists now on our property and intend to restore everything to it's present condition during the process of the construction. The landscaping will be done as per the requirements of the original 8040 Greenline review, as follows: After structural backfill return all boulders 1' -3' for retainage. Spread stockpiled small size fill and top soil between boulders. Rake soil at rt. angle to slope to prepare,for seeding. Spread w/ prodcaster 10 lb. native mix as follows: creeping red fescue, wheat grass, hard fescue, canby blue grass, green needle, mt. sage, and wildflower mix 6% by weight. Mix to he identical to that for Pitkin County airport. Cover seeded area w/ jute matting secured w/ spikes, dampened daily for 30 days. Install scattered plantings of potentilla, choke cherry and other mative shrubs located to provide a native appearance. 9 ' 5. The grading, as shown roughly on the site plan, will be minimal so as not � to disturb the natural terrain and will be primarily directly behind the existing \O LAND USE CODE SECTION 7 -503 Page 2 house. All disturbed areas will be revegetated naturally, as indicated above, as well as augmented with aspen trees as per the existing landscaping. 6. We intend that the placement of the proposed addition will do nothing to detract from the mountain as scenic resource. The Accessory Dwelling Unit has been designed to be accessible from main house or from the existing driveway at the entrance to the house but we feel that accessing it from above where the slope is minimal'is preferable for the privacy of the occupants of the Unit and of the main house as well. Maintaining the existing second access above the house is also advantageous for firetrucks and it's current use for snow dumping. Building the additional gravel driveway needed to reach the proposed garage will not limit the open space and we believe the cutting and grading necessary is not excessive. We have included a statement that explains our request for the new driveway in detail. '1 7. The building height and bulk of the addition is minimal. 40% of the total square footage (715 S.F.) is completely below the existing grade. 75% of the above grade portion is no higher than the existing house. The bulk of the structure has been designed behind the existing house and will blend into the mountain, being barely.visible from any view below Smuggler Mountain. 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are already available to the existing house and will not he compromised in any way by extending them to the addition. 9. Adequate roads are available to the house and are properly maintained. 10. Adequate ingress and egress is available to the house now. Ingress and egress from above for the Accessory Dwelling Unit is preferable, and as stated in number 6, the second access from above will further enhance the access for fire protection. See the statement regarding our request for a driveway easement for more detailed information. 11. The original 8040 Greenline Review required that a trail easement be dedicated generally along the Salvation Ditch. The easement was eliminated when the Siegle employee housing units were approved for lot 3 next door. • \ ✓ 9 y 0 g ¢ o J • R Q P Y n cc N Z - < NI m c _ _l O o g O , w J Y a c N ,v, 0 — 0 0 < 0 V co < • c Z.3 = o. = J Z 1 3 3 A ¢ 3 0 2 w O a a F W m 9 0 C co R . Q 9 D w V U N co Q 0 U / E w a ¢` J O. T • e J J 1 _N N I- LA. i o �. T I/7 F- I ao J • V) w N V) w T Q J • • ci Z Q N • ® I w e • w0y I mm _ I m 0 2 • • • • e 11."- 1 ¢ _I¢ I ; a J 3 W 0 vi 2w o I O m I • • • `_ O 67 •IC I • • h • 11g \ \ 1 d • • • • 1 \ 1 F • \, ■ — I \ \ J �U µy i x " l x \ 6 • e s .. , 3 • o \ o. \ i ■ d \ : N. ? • • p • b O�a � \ \ v a " f1' \ CO r o a \ s, \ ., Ili Smith Conditional Use and 8040 Greenline Review June 17, 1994 LAND USE CODE SECTION 5 -510: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS A. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The proposed A.D.U. will have 699 square feet of allowable floor area. Parking is not required for a one bedroom unit but we are proposing an attached one -car garage. If we are unable to obtain access to the garage then parking for the Unit will be in the space alongside the garage to the existing house. 2. The proposed A.D.U. meets all the dimensional requirements of the zone district, as indicated on the floor plans and elevations, and the outline of the zoning requirements, as listed below. B. DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW STANDARDS 1. The proposed A.D.U. is compatible and subordinate in character with the existing primary residence, as indicated on the site plan and elevations. 2. The proposed A.D.U. does not vary from the dimensional requirements. Item d. requires a minimum side yard setback of 3 feet. The deck for the A.D.U. is proposed to be 6 feet from the property line. ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED ADDITION, INCLUDING THE A.D.U. Lot Size: 15,857 Sq.Ft. - 2370 Sq.Ft. Access Easement = 13,547 Sq.Ft. ALLOWED OR REQUIRED PROPOSED F.A.R.(Total Structure) 1987 Sq.Ft. 1153 Sq.Ft. F.A.R.(Incl. A.D.U. bonus) 2687 Sq.Ft. Accessory Dwelling Unit 700 Sq.Ft. Max. 699 Sq.Ft. Decks q' 298 Sq.Ft. 180 Sq.Ft. Building Height 25 Ft. 20 Ft. Common wall between exist. house and addition 20Z of 30' = 12 Ft. 10.5 Ft. As is obvious from the above figures, the Accessory Dwelling Unit is not being proposed in order to take advantage of F.A.R. bonus for such units. It has been designed to make the best possible use of the space for the renter, including a covered entry, ample living and storage space, a deck, an attached garage and maximizing the view and ventilation possibilities of the building site. It will have a private exterior entrance but is also connected by stairs to the recreation room below it. The door at the head of the stairs in the A.D.U. can be locked off for total privacy of the renter and the residents of the main house. The design and location of the proposed addition was restricted by the location of the existing house and the steepness of the lot. We intend to build it with the same quality and style as the original structure, matching it completely. \1J LAND USE CODE SECTION 5 -510 Page 2 The zoning department has informed us that the length of the common walls between the addition and the existing house are determined by the regulation governing duplexes. It is open to interpretation whether to consider only the 30 foot long southeast wall to which the addition will be attached or to add the 20 foot long 45 south wall of the existing greenhouse to the total. The common wall of the addition is 10.5 feet long. If the calculations are made using the 30 foot adjoining wall only then the common wall must be 8 feet long. If the 20 foot wall is also included then it must be 12 feet long. The 20 foot south wall is only one story high and at a lower elevation, and therefore it's relationship to the addition is less than appears in the footprint. Elevation B illustrates this point. As designed, the addition connects to the existing structure at a 10.5 foot wide cantilevered window seat on the upper floor and off a media room on the lower floor, using the existing exit door. The media room's only window (partially below grade) restricts the width of the common wall toward the north, as is clear on the floor plans. If required we would have to extend the wall 1.5 feet to the south beyond the existing upper level southwest wall. It would be an unsightly detail that would entail considerable expense for minimal gain. There are also some trees at that corner that we don't want to destroy. We would like to request that the common wall be interpreted as only the 30 foot wall that directly adjoins the addition. \I\ Smith Conditional Use and 8040 Greenline Review June 17, 1994 Bob and Glenda Smith Box 3182 Aspen, Colorado 81612 303 - 925 -3937 Re: Lot 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision Driveway Easement for Proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit To Whom It May Concern: We would like to request a driveway easement for our proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit, which will be part of an addition to our house. The details regarding the addition and the A.D.U. are spelled out in the complete package submitted for the Conditional Use and 8040 Greenline review. We would like to build a garage for the A.D.U. which can only be accessed from above our property via an existing paved cul -de -sac. The property on which it is located was originally designated open space but is now being traded to the Austers. The road accesses the driveway for lot 7, next to ours and is used for a turn - around and dumping snow in the winter. We would like to propose several possibilities for accessing our proposed garage, each dependent on the fate of the existing paved road. If it is to be removed as a result of the land trade then we are willing to dedicate some of our land along the property line for relocation of the road, and for snow dumping, if needed. It is not only to our advantage to access the proposed garage, it also provides additional fire protection and serves the City for snow removal. We understand that we will also need permission from our neighbor on lot 7 to cross a corner of that property, as the road does now. Below is an illustration of possible ways in which the easement could be configured. If it not possible to grant us a permanent easement we would like temporary access for our construction equipment. It is the only way in which we will be able to build our addition. \ .\ D 1 1 L ---- -- ill' o nrr�� Iiiiill'iliSP �rr �\ _ See the vicinity map included in the Conditional Use and 8040 Greenline Review for an overview an site plan above. / 1 \ \ ,---,-.---- \ h___\ G-- N ----_-----.- i N1 / 21 ' \ C \ , . . ‘t''': /7 a \/ . • , , . e -‘;.k / - ip 7,4• 'S - vo t t j / 4 / z . 40co„ on! Por ' 4 ( ( i7' 1 --- ( 7 - // - -/ --._., At70111 N NN '-:':\ N ■ if40N5:, N \._,) \ , \ , II / / , \ K / . \ ''' t • _ ,_. tit r k \ I /Writ/ ,;:' • i : 1 n- ---L_N -,7 -1 -- L _ ---------,\_ , ‘ti 1 -1 \ N • w N . i' Li \\ \ \ viol N IT Alsoohp c- i+;z ..,,,* ,,,,,, __ /- ( L - 'r 7 , • 1 l ` nuvs� -- • a1.ays- Dtv --� /' \ /. J �� ' , r ,'60, - // / fi r; ' ✓' ' ,r'' • ' `oND. Cella; �. 'I I in ' . �• ' 1417•11L Ltda. I 1 ' . . . ' :1 4.4 . y - -- \ - -- , • i s r %., d ‘sfra �cl Z Y isi R \; vrorosaD eou�urc rav�aNace • .. 'i.... -•_ ? r-- — - , Al4r. 6X "Rlfl • - _ ... •�� (SSA rapt as sosem n- sesuis7r) • ICI SIDNYAw{D AND laravapin terrace* p120'PD V *l PLAN 4Mrrf4 2SesteNc Len N *LANNY t ete' \\ 3 La 0qt ;- o3wg ail < :ii; blm. \ 6 i l l 'E l Lt z O V<, - 5 te M 2 . Fi (5 fL (n N E-1 Ur" 11 v, 1 e b O, 1.. q. s 3� o / / \_ 1 6 / _ y ,. \a\ p _ v 0 i !/ F 4 / 1 .t9 pe / . fi e_ , €" k h+.`. 4 h Boa` Fyn m, > 03/4:-,. 03/4:-,. � .b c A-., N ti a C et, y d 7 4 >0.. lit lat....* \_ N _ pyi(NNNE r N V �N ��� b V x .1+ N N S . t I s O I Q 4 / a C �' Ili 41 Ili a v 14 s = , , ems J r ' ii 14 a X Min l in ^ 00 _ _ r I it i A z „ __. _......_, -- A 0 ',,ti 1 ti '1.; - /1 It - d o4 snit o \a lad E • I t C $a ti. II s ki -' _ 0 - L s R Z � x l x N 1 � �. r • 4 e �. I II -- �� ,- 11 i3� 1 A a etb, ),/ f, . 1- _ t� Q0 2 Z , , I r o i i I f g w i 1 ' 3 % 1 1 oz a b � 1 li , X aw , L K� I j r �{, II gt �IQ � • 1 I I .. E2 r ■ -- 7 k Ii 1 ! , l� " � ill 1 II i I t it) -1 tYlp O mF IF z f\ 0 r im � � I �m d ' I 4 di t i, fl j : I p c I o� I t - -- z 0 .. 1 II i ioi I - -__ s `IIIIIIIhliN: l.. '' IIIIIIh ' ii " ► I IL _I , I. iI` I 1 EL-11 9 1 I . 1 1 - ,1 . �, ■ ��� I II i, -- W ! __ __ le i n1 hi- per C- ck s 4 t` t — — _I d ' I I 1 II' 1,11iL \--- 1 I' , 1 1 �� ill I1 1 . Iii j icii , ,,, „, ,,, ,, ,. . .,,..E._,:,,,,,,,,,,,,., , ! II I I � i w �1 w lip ;, ' 'HUH' _ 1 _ i I -11 o 6o 11 r oil :i T IL,1,1, l =r 111• II L I 1 II it t.. HIIHNH l nJ- ill 111 i' II I I I I I 1 111 __._ II 1 1 t , vr. 1 I 1 1 1 : ' n 1 I I / I . H I1 II 1 'P 1..�1 1 , l . 1 I ► I I ( 1 ; 1 ,1 1 o 11 ilk a li ,,- - -'II F- . ( W E :1 t yk \ - \ • / / N.... • 1 \ 4/ _ •Itiot .n._ .r .14 a 1., .. \ _ _ ______ - a.......SeAS11,4 trij 1 E ., . , , • g i III 1 1 1 IT o X It 4 , ____, ILI - ; , 1 , : • I IL , 1 1 _ .,.. Alliii•• ; \,,- -.- la. Limey -11- amimiii i d II MAN - lir in Oqii g Q MUM nil , _Lai . ii Z 311 i■ 14 Z - ‘'--- I 1 t 1 -...:.,. ri 1 --=-; . ril _. „ . , L___ ‘.\\ ___ • , it] rlifi"; 1 X .... 14. =... 4f ., _AT , / e ; I , o , r ii._=s _ II I,. ■•■,_.___ Q ....4■ 1 1 1 i „ , ,, / / I - e j a , i 1 .( • 1, t , , ,., i v I k t .. . + \ li . t • , b \ 2, 1 1 )1 1 4 fi 1 1 0 , 1 ._ - 0 , .....,./ I; . ri i , i 1 .4.. , .„7„-.... , - I, , , ,...n. \ s. air __... , 1 \ , 1 I 1 le nompimpl ‘.111F1111111 t i , __,,,, , . h am 1 i 1 1;1 . 1 iii . I ti c i , .„ I . . • ,, t , P i e pi II, r li i a A .ki -1 t --kit” - Li Wril fa I Cla - I I d 1_ . ,, II , :g II nil ll I. SI_ I I , ' ' ^ - k , 0 11 11- - - - - 1111 V. 1 1 )11 i F ral • 4 • ,.. . ii. , ,i ; . . mine: • ..., I MIN JP 1 N # _ - fialli-rit t I 1 1 I 1 , „, , mil ah Po * g • % , I . a I • - - I - • , , 1 . e sq I 1 1 • i I 1 I • 1 I I • 1 0 I 1 . / ri) 7 - 1-791 _--- ___. .- - - - - IIMISI F , � - w ma w s T � ' . L _ I 1 DOW . - _ WVM.ryY.+e • QIZD i 9 AV9ITION COMMON WAN, a I . - --r � -- - ___ E ..._______ ____, L.,. -— = t _ - 1 mil _, ,I _ _I �. ne - =ate ern La _'I M Vi C �I1yp� SON ISOM p 1 r _ G M.Yf� V 1' 1t - ni� F •• . _ I ae ev m , see may. 5ou'n+wser w*v6TIBµ • -FXI*TINGt eM1114 1 E6117E1\ . • � r _ - -- -- - w ; ,. ,-_ - - - i__ - _ _____ - 0 cat* eon � � j 7 t .�� - 1749e 1 . 1 Nil ] . .. 1 .gas alma Ate ..r a ri t6 0rir ,.i � -ie ,.... x Iq 111 � °= 11 I Ir T��l� Tat MW>UW memo pin • _FX1 N6t eM I T F-1 1R- E6119 f \ 'Said/ P�1 FROM : JOHN EMERSON FOSS, ARCHITECT PHONE NO. : 701 232 Amendment 1.O: Mary Lackner Planning Department, City of Aspen From: Bob and Glenda Smith Box 3182 Aspen, Colorado 81612 303 - 925 RE: AMENDMENT to Conditional Ua804Greenline Review Existing Residence on Smugg ler Mountain Lot 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision Date: J 34, 1994 We wish to amend our original submittal, data(' June 17, 1994, which included a proposed garage to be accessed above our house at the back of our lot via an easement which we now realize we will not be able to obtain. We have modified our plans in order to use the F.A.R. from the now deleted garage for living space. As is illustrated in the attached drawings, the amended F.A.R. and footprint is very close to our original proposal. The primary change is the distribution of the space on each level and the addition of a bedroom and bathroom 1. lieu of the garage. In addition to the attached site plan, floor plans and elevations we would like to amend the following aectlons of our original proposal: Section 7 -503 4. The revised addition will tie into the existing upper two levels with the eastern portion of the structure raised a half level above. The entire proposed A.U.U. will be built at the same level as the proposed garage would have been. With the garage deleted we can now take advantage of the southern exposure and views. Except for the A.D.U., the addition will be the same height as the house 1s now. 5, By raising the entire eastern half of the addition, and not just the garage, there will be even less grading necessary than before. '7 . 7. Our amended addition has :3 % of the total square footage ( 7/5 ) below grade and 4' % % of the above grade portion is not higher than the existing house. 1, A ment m rs- -7 kil _ - -- —2 Ea muitnz a . . 4e., • W ‘..�_ -rJ 1 � t ,S� • W 4 a h L `" ! , -v Itsi . _ ' . \ \ I ! 0 JJ .� 2 t N „ :(1/ 4 % p a Inill r o„; N )3 ,„ 4 . , g : ‘ \ i e 41 '- 11V � � • \ Q1 ' 9 O -- - 7j� FROM : JOHN EMERSON FOSCRCHITECT PHONE NO. : 701 232357 POT .f-- - - - -- - r - - 1 - - --\ Amendment i r \ � iw 1 c I_ ." L - - -1 . i I B i M wt. ._ . I w ,___. , r a ill I 3 .1 N N + 1 -I- --2- - - --4 9 214 r---.., A li il " An az '5D FROM : JOHN EMERSON FOSS cCHITECT PHONE NO. : 791 232 a PO4 "r Amendment m \ 7-----:\ 1, x II t o 1 x - r th A - Itt I. 5 \ 0 ilk Looil . MIL - r a I I 9 i : 1 - 1 w, la w H i O 1 . . t I ` ; �1:, _ . _- _• ' q . ';-2 IIIIIIIII2 ill ., o r 3 .sis,A� ill i , -5v C 0 Amendment 1 41 • it _ 4 Z ro II 111 i l l_ l: 11 i -,_ _� w 1 z - -4 i aC 1 — L11t mini ; , I ► I * 111 � i, P L . , ►� • "�INNINIItf. Ifihl � t 1 • L_______11 ii 4 04 l - 1 I j V � _ � I� I l: 0. l L- � 1 I44 A I. k) I II 0 I l „Ell : 1! 1. 2 1 o a -- . tJ _- -- 1- r f- �QY� itg 0. } ��o �1 lie Tad L990 ?EE TOL : 'O'ON 3NOHd 1731IH9dS 'SSOd NOSJ3W3 NHOf : WOtld 1 1 I — 'i 8 Amendment i-ca- vg t'iN i a J k il I 1 i . o . 1 o - 1 -- 7, -- " -- lift . f _ t: f t & t � , I ��i.I�J�- ' x,, S 1® Ii, i , .. .... (:) ..,. . W ;I i I. i 4 I . \Ili' Id 1 1 . 1 . ,111 , [ - I I 1 n I 1 I. 1 L■i :: ' II i +i ' 1 1 1'1 i ii' I L == _ � ; i _ 1 t __. a ----. T -> x I 11.1J l 1-4x 1 --- • 512 Earl L99Z Z2Z TOL : 'ON 3NOHd 17311HObd 'SSOd NOS63W3 NHOE : W021d Exhibit F 33 MEMORANDUM TO: MARY LACKNER, ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE FROM: PHIL OVEREYNDER, WATER DIRECTOR Q DATE: JUNE 29, 1994 ���""��� SUBJECT: SMITH CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT Thank you for the opportunity to review the above referenced application. The proposed accessory unit is located within the city limits and is served by the Aspen Water Department. To the extent the application is found to be consistent with zoning requirements, water service is available from the City distribution system. The applicants should be referred to Kris Everhart (920 -5031) to obtain an estimate of water utility connection charges for the proposed addition and to review any planned changes in the water connection for the existing residents. cc: Larry Ballenger Kris Everhart PO:rl /Oil/smith use 3� Zig PUBLIC NOTICE RE: SMITH CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 19, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen to consider an application submitted by Robert & Glenda Smith, Aspen, CO, requesting approval of a Conditional Use Review for an approximately 700 square foot Accessory Dwelling Unit attached to an existing single family dwelling unit. The applicants are also requesting 8040 Greenline approval. The property is located at 200 Park Circle; Lot 5, Sunny Park North. For further information, contact Mary Lackner at the Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 920- 5106. s /Bruce Kerr, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission • 6722— ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone 920 -5090 FAX 920 -5197 MEMORANDUM TO: City Engineer Housing Director Aspen Water Department Parks Department Zoning Administration Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District FROM: Mary Lackner, Planning Office RE: Smith Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit & 8040 Greenline Review Parcel ID No. 2737- 074 -01 -004 DATE: June 22, 1994 Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Robert & Glenda Smith. Please return your comments to nie no later than July 8. Thank you. rei '`ASPEN /PITK!N PLANNING OFFIC..' 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920 -5090 FAX# (303) 920 -5197 June 22, 1994 Robert & Glenda Smith Box 3182 Aspen, CO 81612 Re: Smith Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit and 8040 Greenline Review Case A47 -94 Dear Robert & Glenda, The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. We have scheduled this application for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission at a Public Hearing to be held on Tuesday. July 19, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. Should this date be inconvenient for you please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Planning Office. Please note that it is your responsibility to mail notice to property owners within 300' and to post the subject property with a sign at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Please submit a photograph of the posted sign as proof of posting and an affidavit as proof of mailing prior to the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call Mary Lackner, the planner assigned to your case, at 920- 5106. Sincerely, Suzanne L. Wolff Administrative Assistant apz.ph GOLD KEY AND WEDUM, i4SSC. 3039258758 P. Adjacent Land Owners Pitkin County 506 E. Main Aspen, Co 81611 Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, Co 81611 Joe and Barb Tarbet 980 Gibson Aspen, Co 81611 Don Delise Box 2495 Aspen, Colorado 81611 David & Boyd and Robert Devine c/o china Club 2130 Broadway New York, NY 10023 John Werning and Walter Stenger 905 E. Hopkins Aspen, Co 81611 Dieter Bibbig Box 175 Aspen, Colorado Bob & Glenda Smith 200 Park Circle Aspen, Co 81611 Marvin and Barbara Goldenson P.O. Box 9111 Aspen,Co 81612 Shirley Ambridge Box 1488 Aspen, Co 81612 Ralph and Marion Melville c/o Mountain Chalet 333 Durant Aspen, Co 81611 _ 2 0 S'5( Qftt9c4 t klDJ e -q X6.9, Cm GOLD KEY nND WEDUM,ASSC. 303.9258758 P.03 Delmar & Constance Hickman 205 Park Circle Aspen, Co 81611 Joseph and Lucy Dunn 940 Matchless Drive Aspen, Co 81611 Charles Bishop 731 E. Durant, Suite 7A Aspen, Co 81611 William Dunaway and Tena Farr Box E Aspen, Co 81612 Magne Nostdahl and Arne Marthinsson 607 East Cooper Aspen, Co 81611 Mountain States Communications,Inc A Colorado Corporation 310 East Main Aspen, Co 81611 Margot Pendleton 180 Park Circle TH -3 Aspen, Co 81611 Hua and Luu Vihn Box 8513 Aspen, Co 81611 Robert Pierce Box 3118 Aspen, Co 81612 Randy Bernard 889 Federal Street Belchertown,Ma. 01007 Jo Ann Valley 7201 York Ave.,SA 1316 • Minneapolis,MN 55435 Doris Latousek,Trustee of 1 -26 -89 Trust 738 Timberline Drive Glenview, Illinois 60025 3 GOLD KEY FIND WEDUN.A 3C. 303958758 P.0 w Judith Lolberg and Don Smith 141 Midland Park Place # E -1 Aspen, Co 18611 Pam Cummingham 141 Midland Park Place # E -2 Aspen, Co 81611 Sandra Knight 141 Midland Park Place # E -3 Aspen, Co 81611 Tom Griffiths Box 11583 Aspen, Co 81612 Jana Rosen Box 9853 Aspen, Co 81612 Joe Wells 130 Midland Park Place # F -2 Aspen, Co 81611 Louise Brainard Box 11354 Aspen, Co 81612 Jamen Hancock 120 Midland Park Place # G -10 Aspen, Co 81611 Alan And Deborah Shapero Box 3659 Aspen, Co 81612 Terry Allen Box 9768 Aspen, Co 81612 Shael Johnson and Michael McCollum Box 3549 Aspen, Co 81612 Valerie Bonis Box 3834 Aspen, Co 81612 7 GOLD KEY AND WENJM, fSSC. 3039258758 P.05 Kim Speck Box 9912 Aspen, Co 81612 Linda Smisek Box 8232 Aspen, Co 81612 Norton and Janet Eisenberg 407 Park Ave. R A Aspen, Co 81611 Carolyn and Herbert Paulides 160 Concord Road Longmeadoe,Ma 01106 Neligh Coates c/ Coates Reid & Waldron 720 E. Hyman Ave. Aspen, Co 81611 Sara Garton 00101 Midland Park Place 4 A -10 Aspen, Co 81611 Carla Lonnholm 101 Midland Park Place# A -11 Aspen, Co 81611 Scott Nichols Box 3035 Aspen, Co 81612 David Patton 101 Midland Park Place # A -13 Aspen, Co 81611 Paul Hanrahan 121 Midland Park Place # A -21 Aspen, Co 81611 Karen Birach Box 9435 Aspen, Co 81612 Cindy Houben Box 9616 Aspen, Co 81612 5 GOLD KEY AND WEDUM. AS=C. 30759250758 P.'31 ✓ , ,. John Zell Box 11314 Aspen, Co 81612 Mary Schwalbach 111 Midland Park Place # B -13 Aspen, Co 81611 S M Dodington Box 8464 Aspen, Co 81612 Muriel Ganz Box 562 Aspen, Co 81612 Jeff Bestic Box 2267 Aspen, Co 81612 Pamela Gassman. 302 Midland Park Place # C -2 Aspen, Co 81611 Tom Boylan & Paul Higgins 121 Midland Park Place # C -3 Aspen, Co 81611 Katheryn & John Koch 121 Midland Park Place # C -4 Aspen, Co 81611 James McPhee and Larry Guida 131 Midland Park Place # D -1 Aspen, Co 81611 Chris & Darcy Lacy Box 4193 Aspen, Co 81612 Maurice & Jean Scraggs 403 Midland Park Place # D -3 Aspen, Co 81611 Ron and Jackie Chauner 111 Midland Park Place # b -22 Aspen, Co 81611 6 GOLD KEY AND WEDUM.ASSC. 3039258758 P.07. David Webster Box 10362 Aspen, Co 81612 Alan and Suzanne Richman 110 Midland Park Place 4 H -10 Aspen, Co 81611 Jeanne Ritter H -11 110 Midland Park Place Aspen, Co 81611 Jame Heck Box 8416 Aspen, Co 81612 Shawn Boyd Box 2204 Aspen, Co 81612 Catherine Hagen 210 Midland Park Place 4 B -10 Aspen, Co 81611 Chris King Box 3065 Aspen, Co 81612 Patricia and Andi Epler Box 785 Aspen, Co 81612 Carol Penn and Carole Williams Box 10944 Aspen, Co 81612 Beatriz Fernandez and Robin White 165 Park Circle # 1 Aspen, Co 81611 8 3039258758 P.04 DOLL KEY AND WE Dl1f1,AS:�C. Stone Davis Box 8904 Aspen, Co 81612 Deborah Flug 616 E Hyman Ave. Aspen, Co 81611 David Schmidt Box 9457 Aspen, Co 81612 David Singer 1160 Kane Concourse Miami Baech, Florisa 33154 James and Marlene Mickey 185 Park Circle, Unit B -3 Aspen, Co 81611 George Newell Box 10250 Aspen, Co 81612 Carl Bentley 185 Park Circle # C_2 Aspen, Colorado 81611 James Thompson and Barbara Seelenfreund 185 N. Park Circle A -1 Aspen, Co 81611 Constance Fisher 185 Park Circle # A-2 Aspen, Co 81611 Suellyn Crisovan 185 Park Circle # A -3 Aspen, Co 81611 Kathleen Hughes Box 3930 Aspen, Co 81612 Reginald and Robin Smith Box 4244 Aspen, Co 81612 4 x 4r `.� X +f 7 7 s= m JP Jl2 • J� J �. z z $. 1 ^. n 0 • . s S D A. c D m t T T EA m j rn, ■ C 0. • S GGGy 0. y p.> o ° '„ i a m� U 7> `n 'T 0 m m 111 C' p ;.. m o m a l 10 N N :., 3 m : 3-0 s T z . m » y y =c ...1.::::7??-1 , _ 03 »d cc = -- 5. o.m � ? -t- 8 mnmm = m o as \z-S m c m Da' d ° 0 5 55_ -, t0 0 .b' t y W f >t m l� 'w < 9 y 9 � D aH 0- " f0 "4:Pm 2 o v X m C y m-0 r — S N m ..2 T% 040 w 9 r O O tilt 5C =. d c , o < S - r O e0 grrr y • y o 5 3 . . 0. c ��Z n m H 0 _ •0 cos _ 8 in 9 0 3 y VT: pG -A .'. ;N DO _ 4 »a F c 00 w ?d 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ which is for hours of Planning Office time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT B : . &Q WIZ By: , ��,,� 2 Diane Moore Mai ing Address: City Planning Director Po 3 / 8-Z 920/9,1 (i „ „ _ . Date: • 2 / LAW OFFICES OF KAUFMAN & PETERSON, P.C. TELEPHONE BROOKE A. PETERSON (303) 925 -8166 E RIN N L. 1. KAUFMAN • FERNANDEZ •• 315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE FACSIMILE ERIN L. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (303) 925 -1090 ROBYN J. MYLER * • ALSO ADMITTED IN MARYLAND •• ALSO ADMITTED IN FLORIDA VIA HAND DELIVERY • ALSO ADMITTED IN NCR YORK AND CONNECTICUT July 14, 1994 JUL 1 Q 19 4 Mr. Bruce Kerr, Chairman Aspen /Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission c/o Mary Lackner Aspen /Pitkin Planning Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Smith A.D.U. Application Dear Bruce: The offices of the undersigned represent Mr. Chuck Rowars, the recent purchaser of property located at 131 Sesame Street on Smuggler Mountain in Aspen, Colorado. That property is immediately adjacent to property presently owned by Robert and Glenda Smith. It is our understanding the Smiths have applied to the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval to construct a 700 sq.ft. accessory dwelling unit attached to the existing single - family residence and for other additions to their home. I wish by this letter to state Mr. Rowars' position with respect to any construction upon the Smiths' property. Mr. Rowars does not object to the construction of the additional dwelling unit or to the other improvements to the Smiths' property, however, that any addition to the home meet all of the requirements of the underlying zone district that the construction is done in accordance with my comments as contained herein, and the additional dwelling unit is utilized for employee housing purposes. First, at this time, it is also our position that the Smiths are to conduct construction on their property and access their property only through their own access and not through any existing access to Mr. Rowars' property. Secondly, Mr. Rowars insists that any fill dirt which is removed during excavation, and not utilized in the refilling around any completed construction, be removed from the site so that it will not disturb or kill any vegetation. Also any disturbance to existing vegetation should be minimized. From our examination of the property, it is apparent that the Smiths are fine stewards of the land and this should not be a problem. • Mr. Bruce Kerr, Chairman July 14, 1994 Page 2 Thirdly, Mr. Rowars is quite concerned about the height of any addition to the Smiths' house. Mr. Rowars believes that the height of any new addition should be no higher than the existing height of the Smiths' home. This position is in accordance with the conditions and the standards for review of any development wherein an 8040 Greenline request is made. As you know, Section 7 -503 of the Aspen Municipal Code requires that: "Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend in the open character of the mountain" as one of the conditions to be examined in association with any application above the 8040 greenline. Clearly, any development which exceeds the present height of the Smiths' residence will not minimize the building height and will not blend into the open character of the mountain. As you know, the design of any improvement located within an 8040 Greenline area must also comply with all of the other conditions contained in Section 7 -503. Finally, in reviewing the proposal for an accessory dwelling unit, I believe it is important for the Commission to also determine that the Smiths' development is "subordinate in character with the primary residence," and that it will actually be utilized for employee housing and not for the Smiths own occupation. Mr. Rowars does wish to be a good neighbor, and we believe the Smith property can be added onto with due regard for our concerns. Thank you for your review of this matter and the consideration of our comments. Respectfully submitted, F.a�i AUFY 4. : - _1� 'r & P TERS N, P.C. A Pr-fessio :1 .rpo .tion By: g \ �. :r•oke A. P- -son BAP /ljn cc: Charles M. Rowars Robert and Glenda Smith letters \kerr Exhibit B Aspen Conso S an ita ti o n I® 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 FAX N(303) 925 -2537 Tele. (303) 925 -3601 Sy Michael Kelly Al e r t l B -Chairman Frank Loushin Albert Bishop - Secy. Bruce Matherly, Mgr. Louis Popish - Secy. JUL - 31994 July 6, 1994 Mary Lackner Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen. CO 81611 Re: Smith Conditional Use Review Dear Mary: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has sufficient line and treatment capacity to serve this proposed development. As usual service is contingent upon compliance with the District's Rules and Regulations which are on file at the District office. There will be connection fees associated with the accessory dwelling unit and additional recreational area (if water fixtures are also added). Total fees can be estimated once plans are reviewed by our office and a tap permit is completed. All fees must be paid within thirty days of billing. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Bruce Matherly — District Manager EPA AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE 1976 - 1986 - 1990 REGIONAL AND NATIONAL 49) /ma Exhibit C Memorandum To: Mary Lackner, Planning Office From: Cris Caruso, City Engineer Date: July 14, 1994 RE: Smith Conditional Use Review for 8040 Greenline and an Accessory Dwelling Unit Upon review of the above referenced application, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 8040 Greenline: The applicant adequately addresses provisions for the 8040 Greenline review. Parking: The on -site parking spaces are adequate in number and function as indicated by the development plan. The parking spaces may not extend into the public right -of -way. Site Drainage: The applicant is advised that storm run -off due to the ADU must be kept on the applicant's property and may not be drained to the alley. Trash Storage: The final development plan must indicate a trash storage area which may not be placed in the public right -of -way and should be indicated as a "trash and recycle" area. Any trash and recycle areas that include utility meters or equipment must provide that these remain unblocked by trash or recycle containers. Prior to commencing work within the public right -of -way, the applicant shall consult the City Engineering Department (920 -8040) for design considerations, City Parks Department (920- 5120) for vegetation alterations including tree removal on private property, and shall obtain permits from the City Streets Department (920 -5130) for any work or development within public rights -of -way. 94006adu.ref 3•9 '^ Exhibit D MEMORANDUM JUL 12 TO: Mary Lackner, Planning Office FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: July 11, 1994 RE: Smith Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit Parcel ID No. 2737- 074 -01 -004 The Housing Office recommends approval for the requested accessory dwelling unit based on the following conditions: Accessory dwelling units shall contain not less than three hundred (300) square feet of allowable floor area and not more than seven hundred (700) square feet of allowable floor area. The unit shall be deed restricted, meeting the housing authority's guidelines for resident occupied units and shall be limited to rental periods of not less than six (6) months in duration. Owners of the principal residence shall have the right to place a qualified employee or employees of his or her choosing in the accessory dwelling unit. The one- bedroomn 1 the unit, 699 square feet, fee and i completely unit is t be a s to be attached p to v the principal residence. The kitchen must be built to the following specifications, per the 1994 Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Guidelines: Kitchen For Accessory Dwelling Units and Caretaker Dwelling Unit, a minimum of a two- burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6 -cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer. Before the applicant can receive building permit approval, the applicant must provide to the Housing Office a signed and recorded Deed Restriction, which can be obtained from the HousingOffice. The Housing Office must have the recorded book and pag e prior to building permit approval. \word \referral \smith.adu w ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE A reement for Pa ment of Cit of As I • n Develo ment A ' , lication Fees • CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for jM r , C if (/ f eo go C am" , fit€ ?a-v (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 77 (Series of 1992) establishes a fee structure for Planning Office applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties to allow APPLICANT to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. or 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree t h at eitt isnimpractic blo for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient Planning Commission and /or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and /or City Council to make legally required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision.