The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.1340 Red Butte Dr.A030-99+ 7 1 PN: 2735-013-03010 Case A030-99 1340 Red Butte Drive DRAC & Stream -C Margin Exemption 4 (3Â·0Â»4U~--2 41- S IMO *080-!re- iDRAC,+ 6.m Â£ Exemr ' PARCEL ID:~2735-013-03010 DATE RCVD: ~3/19/99 - # COPIES:| ' CASE NO|A030-99 CASE NAME:~1340 Red Butte Drive DRAC and Stream Margin Exemption PLNR:~DRAC PROJ ADDR:11340 Red Butte Drive CASE TYP:~DRAC, Stream Margin Exemption STEPSi OWN/APP: Dorothy Wildman ADR 1340 Red Butte Drive C/S/Z: ~Aspen, CO 81611 PHN:~925-5427 REP:~Charles Cunniffe/Jennifer Co ADR: 610 E Hyman C/S/Z:IAspen, CO 81611 PHN~925-5590 FEES DUE:~460 (d) FEES RCVD1460 STAT: F REFERRALSj REF:~ ' BY~ DUE:~ MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED . ' .lili'll'.-/' I ' .i....... ... DATE OF FINAL ACTION) CITY COUNCIL: REMARKS PZ: BOA: CLOSED: 1 #*9 BY: 1 ArtÂ« DRAG: AffAuâ‚¬o PLAT SUBMITD: ~ PLAT (BK,PG):| ADMIN: .912- Delf Amawep DRAC Resolution No. Page 1 RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW APPEAL COMMITTEE APPROVING VARIANCES FROM SECTION 26.58.040(F)(12), VOLUME, OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE FOR A PROPOSED ADDITIONA TO A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 1340 RED BUTTE DRIVE, ASPEN, COLORADO Resolution No. , Series of 1999 WHEREAS, the applicant, Dorothy Wildman, owner, as represented by Jennifer Cohen of Charles Cunniffe Architects, has requested approval of a proposed design for an addition to an existing single-family residence on the property located at 1340 Red Butte Drive; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.58.020(B) of the Aspen Municipal Code, Community Development Department staff reviewed the applicant's application for compliance with the Residential Design Standards of Section 26.58.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code and found the submitted development application to be inconsistent with Standard 26.58.040(F)(12), Volume, of the Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Section 26.58.020(B)(1) of the Aspen Municipal Code provides that if an application is found by staff to be inconsistent with any item of the Residential Design Guidelines, the applicant may either amend the application or appeal staffs findings to the Design Review Appeal Board pursuant to Chapter 26.22, Design Review Appeal Board; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.58.020(B)(1) of the Aspen Municipal Code, the applicant submitted a request for a variance from Standard 26.58.040(F)(12) of the Aspen Municipal Code to the Design Review Appeal Board; and WHEREAS all applications for appeal from the Residential Design Standards of Section 26.58.040 must meet one of the following statements in order for the Design Review Appeal Committee or other decision making administrative body to grant an exception, namely the proposal must: a) yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan; b) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or c) be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints, and WHEREAS, a public hearing, which was legally noticed, was held by the Design Review Appeal Board on April 8, 1999, at which the Board considered the applicant's proposal and associated variance requests; and WHEREAS, a Design Review Appeal Board motion to approve a variance from the Volume standard of Section 26.58.040(F)(12) of the Aspen Municipal Code was passed by a vote of three (3) to zero (0) based on a finding that the proposed design more effectively addresses the issue or problem the "Volume" standard responds to. , DRAC Resolution No. Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the proposed design of an addition to the existing single-family residence at 1340 Red Butte Drive, Aspen~ Colorado, is granted a variance from Section 26.58.040(F)(12), Volume, of the Residential Design Standards based on a finding that the proposed design more effectively addresses the issue or problem the given standard or provision responds to. APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE at its meeting on the 8th day of April, 1999. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer DESIGN REVIEW APPEAL COMMITTEE Chairperson, Steve Buettow ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk, Jackie Lothian Pl t--14 AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW APPEALS COMMITTEE Special Meeting April 8, 1999 5:00 p.m. Thursday Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall I. Roll Call II. Comments (Committee, Staff and Public) III. Minutes IV. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest V. Continued Public Hearing (4/1/99): A. 1340 Red Butte Drive, Wildman Residence, Appeal of the "Volume" standard VI. Adjourn AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW APPEALS COMMITTEE April 1, 1999 5:00 p.m. Thursday City Council Chambers, City Hall I. Roll Call II. Comments (Committee, Staff and Public) III. Minutes IV. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest V. New Business A. 1340 Red Butte Drive, Wildman Residence, Appeal of the "Volume" Standard B. Unit #15C, 631 South Galena Street, Kribs Residence, Appeal of the "Subgrade Areas" Standard. VI. Adjourn MEMORANDUM TO: Design Review Appeal Committee (DRAC) THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Directo~Y 4 FROM: Mitch Haas, Plannerl~f~ RE: 1340 Red Butte Drive (Wildman Residence), Request for a Variance from the "Volume" (26.58.040(F)(12)) Provision of the Residential Design Standards DATE: April 1,1999 SUMMARY: Pursuant to Chapter 26.58, Residential Design Standards, Section 26.58.020(B), of the Aspen Municipal Code, "an applicant shall prepare an application for review and approval by staff. In order to proceed with additional land use reviews or obtain a Development Order, staff shall find the submitted development application consistent with the Residential Design Guidelines." This Section goes on to state that "if an application is found to be inconsistent with any item of the Residential Design Guidelines the applicant may either amend the application or appeal staff's findings to the Design Review Appeal Board \DRAC,1 pursuant to Chapter 26.22, Design Review Appeal Board. " Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for an addition to an existing residence at 1340 Red Butte Drive for compliance with the "Residential Design Standards," (See attached Exhibit A). Staff found that the proposal is not in compliance with the "Volume" standard. The applicant is requesting variances from this standard (described below) in order to allow the proposed design. The application is attached as Exhibit "A. The staff and DRAC reviews are limited only to those portions of the structure that are proposed for alterations (the addition only). Pursuant to Section 26.22.010 of the code, an appeal for exemption from the Residential Design Standards may be granted if the exception would: (1) yield greater compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan; (2) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or, (3) be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Staff is recommending denial of the variance request, finding that the proposed design does not meet any of the three aforementioned standards. APPLICANT: Dorothy Wildman, represented by Jennifer Cohen of Charles Cunniffe Architects. LOCATION: 1340 Red Butte Drive (Lot 1, Block 2, Red Butte Subdivision) is located on the north side of Red Butte Drive (between the street and the Roaring Fork River) across from the intersection of Sage Court. See attached vicinity map, Exhibit B. 1 " STAFF COMMENTS: Section 26.58.040(19(12), Volume The proposed addition contains violations of the "Volume" standard on its east, south, and north elevations. The portion of the "volume" standard relevant to this project reads as follows: For the purpose of calculating jloor area ratio and allowable floor areafor a building or portion thereof-whose principal use is residential, a determination shall be made as to its interior plate heights. All areas with an exterior expression of a plate height of greater than ten (10) feet, shall be counted as two (2) squarefeet for each one (1) squarefoot of floor area. Exterior expression shall be defined as facade penetrations between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the level of the finished floor, and circular, semi-circular or non-orthogonal fenestration between nine (9) and fifteen (15) feet above the level of the finished floor. Simply put, this standard requires that there be no windows (facade penetrations/ fenestration) in any areas that lie between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the height of the finished floor. Thus, one might describe the area lying between nine and twelve feet above the finished floor as the "no window zone." Sheet A2.0 depicts the existing conditions at the area of the proposed addition, and the existing windows already violate the volume standard. Nevertheless, all new residential additions, irrespective of "nonconforming" status, are required to comply with the provisions ofthe Residential Design Standards unless varied by an entity with the authority to do so. Sheet A3.1 of the architectural drawings submitted as part of the application (Exhibit A) shows the elevations of the proposed addition. On the east, south, and north elevations, all windows labeled with a D, E, F, G, H, or J violate the volume standard. Given the lack of compliance with the "volume" standard, the applicant is left with the choice of pursuing one of the following three (3) options. First, the applicant could accept the two-to-one (2:1) floor area penalty for each violating window while ensuring that the entire building, including FAR penalties, would fall within set FAR limitations. Second, they could redesign the proposed structure such that the new form would comply with the "volume" standard, as well as the rest of the residential design standards. Lastly, the applicant could appeal staff s findings to the Design Review Appeal Board. Rather than accept the floor area penalty or redesign the proposed residence, the applicant has chosen to seek a variance from the "volume" standard. Consequently, if a variance is not granted, the applicant would have to redesign to comply with the volume standard. If a variance is to be granted, it must be justified according to one of the three variance criteria. Staff's review of the application relative to said standards is provided below. An appeal for exemption from the Residential Design Standards may be granted if the exception would: (1) yield greater compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan; RESPONSE: There is nothing about the subject proposal that would further the goals, standards, or objectives outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan. An appeal for exemption from the Residential Design Standards may be granted if the exception would: (2) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or, 2 . RESPONSE: According to the proposed revisions to the Residential Design Standards, the purpose/intent of the "Volume" standard "is to ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions." Although proposed code amendments do not hold any force in the review of current applications, staff feels this information might be helpful in understanding the issues/concerns that the volume standard attempts to address. Staff believes the proposed design would have little to no impact on the street-facing architectural detailing, human scale, or pedestrian experience associated with the residence, and staff recognizes that the proposed addition will be set back more than ninety (90) feet from Red Butte Drive (see site plan, Exhibit A). However, based on a strict reading of the standard, staff finds that the proposed design does not satisfy the criterion of more effectively providing street-facing architectural details and elements which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions. Therefore, while staff feels the proposal is rather "benign," staff finds that this criterion is not satisfied with the proposed design. An appeal for exemption from the Residential Design Standards may be granted if the exception would: (3) be clearly necessary for reasons offairness related to unusual site speci.fic constraints. RESPONSE: In terms of site specific constraints, there are no unusual physical conditions (i.e., topography, natural hazards, etc.) where reasons of fairness would dictate that the proposed noncomplying windows must be included in the design. While existing vegetation and setbacks from the street as well as from the neighboring property would aid iii mitigating the impacts of the proposed addition, these are not unusual site specific constraints where reasons of fairness would make the proposed design necessary. In summary, staff recognizes that the proposed addition is relatively modest in scale and benign in impact. Staff further recognizes that the subject location is not within one of the historic, traditional neighborhoods of Aspen or on a grid street system. Nevertheless, since the proposed design does not, in staffs opinion, meet the strict standards of any of the three criteria for granting a variance, staff recommends denial of the request. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the DRAC deny the variance requests, and direct the applicant to redesign the residence to comply with all of the residential design standards, including the "volume" standard. This recommendation is based on the finding that the project, as proposed, does not satisfy any of the three criteria by which a variance can be granted. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to deny the variance requests, directing the applicant to redesign the residence to comply with all of the residential design standards, including the 'volume' standard." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit "A" - Submitted application package Exhibit "B" - Vicinity Map Uj r ) i Â» 0#, E__L 2. \ '" I -4 //4 1 -1 11 \ 1 19,-2 ' 1 ,-r-v -_ I f 1 - f - -1-Â·~ rlÂ·* i , v --*ti-Â· ~__ i >l U 3 1- T , rt- 11 4- 7, .<N\14 .--7 , r--~ Ti,21 1 l-~ 1 ~~U - :V CÂ»-5 -i ( . . - 1 04 7'-Â·-44Â·211241=f-/7/,/, ~ 4 / 1 #"32%# F---il Pr -J r-- 1 r. - ---- /\\ N L JILIT' ~T ,--1 I L 19 -/ 4 - 14/ NR \ L 1 L_, 1 ~ ~ 1,9 \\ 1,1. x \ f '. // -M.- L 1 \X~ - . 1 4 -'39 43-f'/r 1\'- 1 -----Luit) 1#-1 1 0Â«j O' f i i i, i'$1-i___ 1 IL=Â« ~ 0 1 1 1 V'/ 3 Â£ f-3-1 l-flf 1.1 -1 f . A -/f 6/*| E-,4 . 4-J E 4 0< \ ' ,--- i -9/H,c/% -- 1 3-7 1 / 1 7 14 V 13% , A-1-'0 7 1,1 1 3, + M l /.1-91 ~ 1.17 1%-1 1L ..4~ \\ \\\ :j (i- kil ~ 9 4 *\%, i 1-7.4 7 - \~ 4 1 .....Al - .*r-Â·14 -1 1-_u ~f 31\\T-051 /L- 4 -9-\ ff-t-fe-- N 411 j O 1 'fll./.7, 2 14/ d ' h' A,/ J ~Ini ~" r~~F&/ ~~~ i 9 /6- 2-7 /(151\\91 \\\ <\< /- -t-fl-i /236 \ 98 1~ .1// 1 /1 4 0 ' 4 7 ,I i &---41-\ 1- hiÂ·j i 1 1% 9 1 Of A O f / / 1\44 1 \141 1 \\ -914 1 1 1-11' 31IS 0 '1\ >\\ Â« 00 09 A.1-10 9 9 r) L f _ -- \ \ 11\. 1 1 6 (D CD I \ f,-f f 1 p_:< li-us@y '94 I / 4 444 101/ MEMORANDUM 42<) hA-- - f /4 ~ TO: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director â‚¬G, ' 19> 414, FROM: Mitch Haas, planner A~,~ RE: 1340 Red Butte Drive (Wildman) Stream Margin Review Exemption. Parcel I.D. No. 2735-013-03010. DATE: March 24,1999 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a Stream Margin Review exemption to make an addition to the westerly side of an existing residence. The addition would not be on the side of the structure adjacent to the river (the addition would be on the westerly side of the building and the river is on the northerly side). The building is a detached single- family residence. Community Development staff recommends approval of the requested stream margin review exemption for the Wildman Addition at 1340 Red Butte Drive (Lot 1, Block 2, Red Butte Subdivision). APPLICANT: Dorothy Wildman, represented by Jennifer Cohen of Charles Cunniffe Architects LOCATION: 1340 Red Butte Drive (Lot 1, Block 2, Red Butte Subdivision) is located on the north side of Red Butte Drive (between the street and the Roaring Fork River) across from the intersection of Sage Court.. ZONING: R-30, Low-Density Residential CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residential, free market. STAFF COMMENTS: Because development is proposed on a lot abutting the Roaring Fork River, the proposal is subject to stream margin review. Ordinance 3 8 0 f 1996 amended the stream margin review provisions of the Municipal Code (codified as Section 26.68.040(C)) to include an exemption for "expansion, remodeling, or reconstruction of an existing development . . . if the following standards are met." As 1340 Red Butte Drive is a privately-owned, existing development, and the proposed addition is of such - - minimal magnitude, Community Development staff finds that the proposal would be eligible for an exemption, provided the following five (5) standards are met: 1. The development does not add more than ten (10) percent to the floor area of the existing structure or increase the amount of building area exempt from jloor area calculations by more than twenty-five (25) percent and RESPONSE: The proposal would not add more than ten (10) percent to the existing floor area, nor would it increase the amount of building area exempt from floor area calculations. The existing FAR on the site is 4,174 square feet, and the proposal would add another 252.7 square feet (an increase of 6%). There would be no increase (0%) in areas exempt from FAR calculations. 1 1 .\ 2. The development does not require the removal of any tree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Section 15.04.450. RESPONSE: The proposed development would not require the removal of any trees for which a permit would be required. See attached letter from Rebecca Schickling, Assistant Parks Director. 3. The development is located such that no portion of the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will be any closer to the high water line than is the existing development and RESPONSE: The proposed development would be located along the side of an existing single-family residence, and would be further from the high water line than is the majority of the existing building. 4. The development does not fall outside of an approved building envelope if one has been designated through a prior review; and RESPONSE: There is no designated building envelope; therefore, this standard is not applicable. Nonetheless, the proposed development falls within and would comply with all setback requirements associated with the property. 5. The development is located outside of the special flood area and more than one hundred (100) feet measured horizontally from the mean high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage of structures within the special flood hazard area. RESPONSE: The development will cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage of structures within the special flood hazard area. Moreover, the proposed development would be located outside of the special flood area and is at least 139 feet from the closest point of the mean high water line of the Roaring Fork River. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested stream margin review exemption for the Wildman Addition at 1340 Red Butte Drive (Lot 1, Block 2, Red Butte Subdivision). APPROVED BY: Juli73(En Woods, C~unity Development Director V ATTACHMENTS: â€¢ Submitted application packet 2 LAND USE APPLICATION . I. PROJECT: Name: IN <LP/MAN APOITION Location: 1340 Fet:> borrE PrzlvE, boT{,8600Â£ 2, FED BulTE 5012,13)/vis/ov (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLICANT: Name: IX),WN-IT W C l-C)M/IAN Address: 13,40 1261? eorte PAvE, ,*PEN Co Â©le/l Phone #: 926 - 94-27 REPRESENTATIVE: ~ jav/l,=274 OW-~J F:Â£02. -Name: CHAALia Ook)NIFFE AMEM-rECIA Address: 12/0 B. HYMAN , Aâ‚¬â€¢19 EN' CO.g le/l Phone #: 926- 9510 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use ~ Conceptual PUD El Conceptual Historic Devt. Special Review E Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ~1 Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal U Conceptual SPA j Minor Historic Devt. GMQS Allotment U Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ~ Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption U Subdivision E Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline,lbam U Subdivision Exemption (includes [3 Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake BlufT, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ~ Lot Split E Temporary Use E] Other: U Lot Line Adjustment U Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) 1415 5 AN GE{%-CINE, 4214-,0 ster. S /Ne.(2 PARALLY Ra/pe/CE U)(\Al/No#UG ON THE UAT Kilt,1-EN ELâ‚¬ VARON BTW Â· 1-12 Fr. PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) WE FADFDSâ‚¬ m ADP A 262.7 58, er. #12EAKPA87- All. 77Â·07- USES 77te SA#ME 10LNDOW CONF{ ev#ATION 3Â¥ CON'nkloiNE, THE. 6*1971Ale BOOF L/NE DOT-7-D 7#E 6457:- Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ D Pre-Application Conference Summary E] Attachment # 1, Signed Fee Agreement ~ Response to Attachment #2, Dimensional Requirements Form D Response to Attachment #3, Minimum Submission Contents D Response to Attachment #4, Specific Submission Contents [3 Response to Attachment #5, Review Standards for Your Application Muummu MEMORANDUM I. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ,/3 610 E. HYMAN, ASPEN, CO 81611 970/925-5590 970/925-5076 FAX ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS TO: FROM: Jennifer Cohen DATE: March 18,1999 PROJECT: Wildman Addition JOB NO.: 9861 REGARDING: FAR calculations NOTES: SLOPE REDUCTION Site square footage = 33,040.0 sq. ft. square footage below high water line 2,820.00 sci. ft. 30,220.0 sq. ft. ALLOWABLE FAR PER ASPEN LAND USE CODE For a lot size of 30,584.5 sq. ft. a base minimum = 4,500.00 sq. ft. PLUS 6 sq. ft./ea. 100 sq. ft. of lot area over 1 5,000. = 30,220.0 - 15,000.00 15,220.0 / 100 = 152.2 X6= 913.2 sa. ft. 5,413.2 sq.ft. total FAR FAR Garage Main Level Square footage = 594.00 sq. ft. 1 st 250 not applied to FAR 2nd 250 X1 /2 = 125.00 sq. ft. over 500 = full = 94.00 sa. ft. Total: 219.00 sa. ft. Lower Level 780.00 sq. ft.* Main & Upper Levels 3,175.00 sq. ft. Garage 219.00 sa. ft. Total Existing: 4,174.00 sq. ft.** Proposed Addition: 252.7 sq. ft. Total: 4,426.7 sq. ft. * Not applied to FAR ** The maximum allowable FAR is 5,413.2 sq. ft.. 4 - ATTACHMENT 5 Stream Margin Review Exemption 1. The existing square footage is 4,174.0 sq. ft.. The proposed addition is 253.0 sq. ft., which is less than 10%. This also does not increase the areas that are exempt from floor area calculations. 2. Tree Permit - See Attached 3. None of the proposed addition will be built closer the the high water line than the original structure already is. 4. The addition does not fall outside the approved building envelope. 5. The addition is located outside the special fiood area and is at least 139 feet from the closest point of the mean high water line of the Roaring Fork River. THE CITY OF ASPEN March 18, 1999 RE: 1340 Red Butte Drive Jennifer Cohen of Charles Cunniffe Architects and I did a site visit today to 1340 Red Butte Drive to do a tree inspection. All Aspen trees to be impacted by the development are under code and no tree permit is needed. j 9,40(4 1 Rebecca SchickliNg- 0 Assistant Parks Director a 1. Ar 70=Â£31- 3/7 0 fo Uplic U U U R 4 * <\64:0 9* bUrâ‚¬ De Â· ) - .t %. 2 1 + :3*U- i *4* . 74 4-- 919,7 it ta *>t A,944 -P 0> S 48040& 044 N 94-4 8 .045&\.:04+ A 3 904 7 0.9 O 4 41 - f )18 .0 2444 ./... N. .9 le . 44444. MMounta:n View Dr hz t~,s Â®407}:lhay L.:. - st?ow - Rd 6 .34 >Â»-<Irt ,Â»2,426Â«,7 9 ~- /~.W. fl?0 0 j %:,SnoWBunny Ct sierra 4 14>4 9.-* 90\,1~OF ... 7 9.,4. *49< *' Aspen *46. '04 9 1. I 9 Institute - -- - - - -- . rt. 34 il e soaring. / m % tw > ~ .F 21 3 8 Â·Â·Â·p~ f k 23& il 6 . Music . ~Cig- ?2. h<0 6 .7/ rl Fe 3~ c Tent * Iwood Duck Ln ,<0 3 0 - 4 ta . 3 Gillespie St .. S /0 Pearl Ct =-- 4, 0 - --in & ... e j Â«h--chee. }14 444 44 = '*Cs St.. V % . .. * * 4 . .. / 1 g . 4 1 4. .... Â»,3 2 ;S .:.69+.. 4*Via ,. .% . 6>.9.1. P 4 I y f *< :Â· p. y 4. \1 & 22 f 4. 23+ . .4. 7 840 } m 3 4 / I i ..# 07 029.4 Mi" 4 . 3 4 4 40 ~ 9. 6 dirp/ >60 4- 1 - 80 41,6 ka >-Of / e # , / 62. 02 2 82 /8 101 n . .4 7 f '87 i %Hosp. t,: . $ Â« % 2 qI .Â· *9**,heW v 2 0 4 10 irnrose Path:IN 46\1-*4 99904*. ~ 90 - Â¢ I. .t ..,-4.{f & q, 6 - 4 -2 O 42 420 b 401#C : *02 7 47 ..h U #aÂ«#, r *e.:.5 - Mall c Ail,en ... /1 : - 29 %*0 + "444 rksn.., 42, 2 IN u;Mlld 1 'fr adowood Dr y Â»/ ,Â«-6/4, ATTACHMENT 3 Minimum Submission Contents 1. See Attached 2. 1340 Red Butte Drive Lot 1, Block 2 Red Butte Subdivision, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. 3. See Attached 4. See Attached 5. See Attached DOROTHY S. WILDMAN -4 ip k q ~le-- \0-QcÂ».0... ~C- Pke:kk C t:=4~11)Â¢Â». * - 9&22- Uu_ _0' VA vs. 1 / _241... C -e-'/* Â»-6 #_te/..Â£1'J35-- N.WL. 4-1.- CL~01\\ 9 I ' --1 44& a.-*tÂ»uj #A CLe-â‚¬glE al A -R ht r iK> 9 1/2421 UU .GLLÂ»aA Xe- a.hAK/limEQX- 6/i, 19 0Â«Â» Ueâ€¢-uL ~ 9 2- S- - 5-99 0 C O 52/6\ / 0 . , ~_..,-Â·0&%eft# SS. Le 314-9.Lu o i co Witz<* 01-uQQQ (24.- . GÂ»IÂ«SUL.*- Co 2 161 1 46 Q-1 5 - S 4 17 Et*ralart OF SE:rnaeTr Buyer's Property Address: 1340 RED BUTTS DRIVE ASPEN, CD 81611 Seller: ALAN R. RYPINSKE, TRUSTEE Purchaser: DOROTHY S. WILDMAN, TRUSTEE Settlement Date: 03/14/97 Date of Proration: 03/14/97 legal Descripticn: Im 1, BLOCK 2, RED BUrIE SUBDIVISICN File No: PCT11446C2 Description Debit Credit Contract Sales Price . ........................................ 2,900,000.00 SEWER 1/1-3/31 $72.83 ........................................ 14.58 Deposit or earnest money......... ..................../....... 100,000.00 CURRENr TAXES 01/01/97 to 03/14/97 .......................... 940.10 Settlement Fee to PrIKIN C]JUNTY TITLE, INC. 150.00 DE:tEIE PREPRINIED EXCEPTICNS ......... ........................ TAX CERTIFICATE ....... ....................................... 20.00 EXPRESS CHARGE Recontng Fees ............................................... 11.00 State Tax/Stamps ............................................. 290.00 ASPEN TRANSFER 'IAX - WREIT ................................... 14,500.00 ASPEN TRANSFER 'IAX - HREIT .. ................................. 28,000.00 REPAIRS - ESCRCW ............................................. REOORD TRUST AFFIDAVIT ............ 6.00 Sub-Tbtals 2,942,991.58 100,940.10 Ralance due fram Buyer 2,842,051.48 TE,mLS 2,942,991.58 2,942, 991.58 APPKNO ard ACCEPTED CZDc'-I -1.60 JO >4- NL---12 Broker: ~ PROI~ / 113{Y S. WIUM\N, TROSTEE 1-1.-1 -li -,/ Br)â‚¬ k:L~~530EI~'~ '/1 ' U PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, 1*t. (7) WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made thiâ€¢ 14 day of MARCH 1997, between ALAN F. RYPINSKI, TRUSTEE FOR THE RYPINSKI FAMILY TRUST OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE , STATE OF CA -~ GRANTOR, -~DECLARATION OF TRUST OF DOROTHY S. WILDMAN DATED AUGUST 5, 1991 ARANTEE whose legal addregg im : 701 8. MONARCH, ASPEN, CO, 81611 CITY OP ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF CO WITNEggiTH, That for and in consideration of the eum of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and mufficiency of which to hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, gold and conveyed, and by thâ€¢,e prement, doao grant, bargain, sell and cenvey and confirm unto the grantee, his heir, and aggigng forever, all the real #Efaggity EogiEha-With 24*6Vemants, if any, situate and lying and being in the Town of ASPEN, County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows: I,OT 1, BLOCK 2, RED Burre SUBDIVISION lilli'll' Imii' 11 lilliI'll'11'11' '111'll lili lili 4 03/14/ill7 10:4*A ND 1 0/ 2 R 11.00 D 2".00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY OLD 04 ~~RATION RECEIVED 13/14/1997 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditamints and appurtenances thireto belonging, or in anywige appertaining, and the riversion and reversions, remainders, rents, ieeues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interiat, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor aither in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtâ€¢nancee. To HAVE AMD TO HOLD the gaid premises above bargained and described, withÂ°iMIFQqMI/*bealned,1 4unte ,Â·the,rabt#e; 1tli I{*11'W-*Â¢(fiel" ~aihiode fokevir, - And the Grantor, for itBelf, ite aucceâ€¢gors and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, ite heirs and aggigns, that at the time of the enmealing delivery of the presents, it is well *eized of the premises above conveyed. haâ€¢ good, cure, perfect, abgolute and indefea,ible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, Bill and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the game are free and cloar from all former and other grants, bargaing, sales, liens, taxe*, aggessmente, encumbranoes and reatriationg of whatever kind or nature goever, except those matters aa set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DE/IND the above bargained premiges in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs tile 9 and a,aigns, againat all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the 5 -Â¥ whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the uâ€¢â€¢ of gender â€¢hall be applicable to all genderâ€¢. Â£ 41 4- laW-v-32# Fik-+717-~1(4 4~5 *,48'.'4#*4'....44.4-JÂ·'*41*11 - STATE OFCtdt.\ur.W.k ) COUNTY OF CV*"Â¥- 1 8.. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1 1 day of O'LACI , 19 97 , by ALAN X. RYPINSKI, TRUSTEE FOR THE RYPINSKI FAMILY TRUST f /4-raic,4 <F/NE 1.1.,613%4 TEr*5444 wITH:08 my hand and official seal 'bcONâ€¢L 2194 my commission expires: BAMAHIT Notary Public 04> lacxua.JulÂ¢ 2030 BI'liw mm.W AIN" 1 fc r I 44 G Emiprr A W. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ,/3 610 E. HYMAN, ASPEN, CO 81611 970/925-5590 970/920-4557 FAX ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS DRAC Committee City of Aspen March 18,1999 Wildman Addition We are asking a for a variance to the Ordanance 30 code that relates to windows being between 9' - 12'. As you can see from the existing drawings, the windows we are proposing are an existing condition. The following items are reasons that we feel this design solution is appropriate. 1. We are keeping the original intent of the design by keeping the same roof line and window configuration. This house has many different roof lines which give it it's character, we are extending a portion of this roof to keep the uniqueness of the original design. 2. We are keeping the original layout of the windows by moving the same design forward and then finishing off the design. 3. The proposed elevation is not part of the front fagade and will not be seen from the street. 1 FROM LINES IN SPACE 19709633852 03-18-99 11:14AM TO 9-7 P.2 I.- 547'-50'12- 1 OS. 00 f) ..- -- A=>Â·r (4 3210*N- 4 Lol: i Bfock z. no 0- Scale: 4% '40' P \0 4 0- 1 a rn JN , 14 W Â·Â· 0 1~ 4' â€¢ 2 Xec -1.- h f r .1 e . 1 --s Le,J 2,- i ' /0 5â€¢-(1Â»Ae Uu..10 W b Â« brt-so vâ€¢. /' r'4- A Â« 1 . . I 0 f 4, 4 /6...9 ' ~ 49 23Â· J' 4 -7 li-1, .f L o.â€ž fL, . I %1 # 9 /,1-~341-_-6 7 E - 04= L 1 0 U> F 4 , 4 A % . +7'' . :. PIF. ry 'U .2 9 Y. 7.~ >'.i - 91 / ! 1% 1:- I I t - : I . FI , 1 f y . 12315.-- r ''Gy' 1x 0 1 : , t*l 3â‚¬= fl83. AA' y- = <43.0, 3@ect_ 8..662 -D~lve 0- 2,14Ccates #ou,ut_ <eba,- i co:r) O-tâ€¢-dicalâ€¢, s.1 p.0. 1-Â· markect L .6 - f hill I Legal Descr~ption: Lot 1, Block 2 Red Dutte Subdivision, Cily of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. I hereby certify that on April 15, 1988 a survey was conducted by me and under my ~ direct supervision of the above described parcel of land. All easements, encroach- ments and rights-of-way in evidence or known to me are shown. This survey is true and cor~ect to the ~st of my knowledge and belief. By: Â»â‚¬*ty twâ€ž_*e- Syclphy 1,~hricome Ty. L.S. 11 1-1-7- -- 1 Street Address: 1340 Red Butte Drive Aspen, Colorado 'IÂ»*Â¥04 evied:; St,unrect 4 rapY, - ti %.6, .i 101 1Al,?69'*6 ~ 14111 1~ . -./-" t, Lialililli.*irawnE, 1 pu]6dl4,imU;~L _ --Mrrfri....*-***-- ~ LINES IN ~~ evisej ,//6/99- u 1 1% T- 6 0' :01197 166,Â¢ :1~~~~~ ~~~st -Re vise. d 1 I Diw Ls,Â£ 7 /1 9189. 2-S- 4%. 4408 - ..16*LE:it!~Val Zj Received Time Mar.18, 10:06AM i 41 /1.3 9 05 3' 30' E- . . . . 0 . . . 4 0 1 1,1 l j 4 - 1 WI LDMAN ADDII ION 1340 RED BUTTE DRIVE ASPEN, COLORADO . i - C -el 'ARLES CUNNIFFE ARCI 111 ECTS CA 610 EAST HYMAN AVENUE * ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 * TELE: 970/925-5590 * FAX: 970/92 0-4557 k . . 0 . . . . . i r . . 0 . . . . C I ...... 1 JV-L ,/46 Â£1 CA 10- I - 11. .r .1 iLUI i le - f I ISSUED FOR: DATE: DD 3-1-99 1 DRAC REVIEW 3-19-Â·-99 211 I I W -3 10 0 rid I 14/1 - L1 - 1- 20 ul cok 2/1- - U % 5 LU 1 - 1 1 1 1-[6] 006 1 - U 10 01 lool 1 1 271 1 1 1 1 UJ 1 1 1 44 1 1 ---All 1 LLI ~ FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ENLARGED PLAN 4 (1) 94" = 1'-O" ~ Z U - 1-1 E J El 1-,gÂ»\ 0/ \634 -3 1 1 LpÂ»L __1\ \\\4>k \ 1\\ \ h 1 03-\[4Â» 1 1 - . r--- 1 1 11 1 1 1 | DRAWING FIRST FLOOR PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS 4---_-__-__---__-_______3 ,4 r-,i i\ EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1 1 ----I --- r-7 C --- JOB NO. 9861 DATE 03-01-99 N SHEET NO. h EAST ELEVATION 6 A2.0 SHEET OF . 0 . 0 . . Â©CORRIGHT CHMLES CUNNIFFE ARCHmETS 41 4 6 : 3* 0669- SZ60Z6 3131 * 1198 00 'NaldSÂ¥ * 10Â£ 311nS . '3AV NVINAH 16Â¥3 025 * 9EZE-BU/t)Z6 :3131 * SE#[9 OI) '3Cllilf-Il-131 * 3/\V OCIVHO1O0 3 0EE ODÂ¥30100 'N3dSV NOLUCIGV NVNal IAA 3AING 3-11(19 CIEIN OVEL . 0 . 0 . 0 . Cf :A . . - 11. 1. .lul_11 FOR: DATE: 3-1-99 VIEW 3-19-99 0 40# =-6-1 10 0 lo Ol FIRST FLOOR PLAN 94" = 1'-O" Â¢e i ' 1 1 J 1 . 1 \ 1 1 __11_2 f IU_U L | | -1 r___ Â£ 11 11 11 lid J -V- -- , 22-2* 0 - 3 T - ' D SKYL/GHTS ~ r 1 1 1 r v i IG /Â« 1 OOR PLAN LAN & WINDOW ILE I. 9861 03-01-99 V /V SHEET NO. MJ ROOF PLAN A2.1 0 SHEET OF 0 0 0 0 0 CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Z9S6 * BEZE-AZ00Z6 :3131 * SEN.9 00 '3(]lilnll31 * '3AV 0(]VZI0100 3 02 OCIVMO1O0 'N3dSV * 0695-Sm/0Â£6:3131 * LL9LB OD 'NBdSY . tOE 311nS * '3AV NVINAH 1.SVE! 016 - 0 00 1 00 0 . : .. D.. D 0 .: ... - 00 0 1 - --4. ' .. B. . . 0 . 0 1 - I 0 ':0 . r - ..1 . ..... .. --- Vil. f 0 .:, 0.0 4 . 0, 0 ... . .. a 4 â€ž-m 4 : D A: 0 0 00 A. ..A . ee D. . 1 .... 1 .. A. A r . 0 A A I. 0 - A. A = A : I I . .. . 1 0 . . I . . A .. . 0 A . 4. .A . I. D. a I 1 0 ....D A O ... .. . 0 .A 0 . . I A 0 ....1 A O ... 0 1 . 2 0 .1 ;0 3 .A .... .00. 0 e .. ee .:. .. 0. 0. .. C (iii) CA ISSUED FOR: DATE: DD 3-1-99 34 J DRAC REVIEW 3-19-99 1 1 1 IJ TOP OF BEAM EL= /14'-434" ./. ~ NOTE: 1 / / _3 TO MATCH EXISITING l4503 14Â« 1 1 \ CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO 1\44.ti~ TOP OF BEAM EL= m'-9/2" +/- VERIFY ALL HEIGHTS AND ////1--------------------------- L-=21< V //2 1 1327% TO MATCH EXISITING T.O.PLATE (4 2 8 C>:71Ir E> EL= 109'-11%. BUILDING IN FIELD. ~|~ R & $ DIMENSIONS OF EXISITING LLI ~7-- '- --- - =- 1 , 1 - 4214=49 -6 -2 U l - 1- -/ r =22% Ena r TOP OF FINISHED FLOOR @ EXISITING KITCHEN EL= /0097 0 1--------------------- - --=7-011 : 1 1 - \/ 1 \ 1 TOP OF FINISHED FLOOR Â© PROPOSED ADDITION \. EL= 999 AA 1 1 11 1 1 11 r -- -----3 1111 0-7 Z - --- U LU - EAST ELEVATION CE: -1 (1) - I/4"=1'-0" Z U 0 0 1 Â©E 1 -- TOP OF BEAM TO MATCH EXISITING TOP OF BEAM ' M ul 11 11 hUUU TO MATCH EXIS/7-ING 1 - le 111]11 11=-1 <Ji> 1 11- L U U oIl [1 11 -4 --t[-1,1 -19 - ============1 2 0 2 . ELI - TOP OF FINISHED FLOOR Â© EXISIT. -- --- -- ~ EL= /009 1- 1 1 --i- \ 1 11 ----------1 \ / 1 11 1 1 ~ /6 TOP OF FINISHED FLOOR Â© PROPOSED ,/~ ~ 4 1 1 [EL---- - -----C] *P EL= 99/-0" 118 DRAWING A--1- L__J ELEVATIONS 1 1 1 1 - SOUTH ELEVATION -) NORTH ELEVATION _1-Jâ€ž (3) (2) L-_J - 74"=1'-0" JOB NO. 9861 DATE 03-01-99 SHEET NO. A3.1 SHEET OF . 0 0 . . . . Â© COPYeGHT CHAMES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS * 0695-5ZG0Z6 :3131 * LL918 OD 'NidSY * LOE 311[16 . '3/W NVINAH -LSVEI OES * 9EZE-92/0Z6 *3131 * SEM.9 OD 'BC]IZInl-131 * '3AV OC]VZIO1OD '3 0ZZ OaÂ¥30100 'NEIdSV NOI-MCIC]V NVINal IM 3AIPICI 31.LA8 a321 OfEL . . 0 . . . 0 . C CA ISSUED FOR: DATE: DD 3-1-99 DRAC REVIEW 3-19-Â·99 VILEI,i E-1 - 1 1 1 r-1 - 1 L -1 1 1 ----- -2 11 - 4.1 1 1 -- 1 11 2 Z 1 1 1 r -1 7 r - 1 L -1 r U L-1 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 -/223232227232233[3339-1 - SECTION {1) U LLI -1 Z U 1-1 F-7 L 11 1 1 1 ./<21 .y..iltix =3 9/Ott/ 2 1 1 11 1 11 f --r \ - & 10 Ill_ ICÂ© 8 1-Unlink 200 1 1 1 cir=...- 1 1 -- - - --- 111 ili~ 1 1 - ___________________________________ DRAWING 1 1 -3 )111 r-11 1 1 1 ,","'",",",""'",",",",",",",",".I- 11%**00--4-- -- --- r--1~ BUILDING SECTIONS JOB NO. 9861 DATE 03-01-99 - SECTION - SECTION SHEET NO. (3) (2) - 74"=1'-0'1 - 74" =1'-0" A4.1 SHEET OF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CUNNIFFE ARCHNECTS 9Z0S-SE@OZ6 :XY:1 * 0655-SZ6/t)Z6 :3131 * LL918 00 'N3dSV . LOE 311nS * '3AV NYWAH 15Â¥3 DE Z996-9ZZ/0Z6 :)(V:I * 8â‚¬ZE-BEL/t)Z6 :3131 * SEN.9 OD '3(]IZInl131 * 'EIAV OC]VMOIOD '3 0ZZ OCIÂ¥30103 'N3dSV NOillaay NVINC]liAA 3AING 3-1-LAEI a321 017'EL