The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.337 Silverlode Dr.A117-004,.g 2737-074-30-007 V..P A117-00 '1* 9 337 Silverlode Drive DRAC -Kbuoak 52+r3 UCIL - 1 *S , 1 1, . 4 A i I Â· . Id,346'.4.- I Â¥ 4.,1 + 3. 4. , lip ':7 4*â€¢ . : It.6 e. ..9 . VT ...4 AFF. . . /.1 ..1 .1 6 .... Â· . i â€¢â€¢4 24*BEL ID:'|2737-074-30007 | DATE RCVD: 9/19/00 -*+ # COPIES:1 CASENO|A117-00 CASE NAME:~Kowalick Residence DRAC PROJ ADDR:~337 Silverlode Drive CASE TYP:~DRAC STEPS~ OWN/APP:|Robert Kowalick ADR 2710 Ledgewood CT. C/S/Z: Rochester/MI/48306 ~ PHN: REP:|David Pinicho . ADR: 1533 Juniper Hill Road C/S/Z: Aspen/CO/81611 PHN: 923-5394 FEES DUE:|480 D ~ FEES RCVD: Bill Them I STAT: [37 REFERRALS 1 1 1.. * REF:1 f BY| ~ DUE: ~ - Z g -:3 -~ 1 0. + ..1% MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED , AU . St'. L N + + ..1/ 1 . DATE OF FINAL ACTION: [1/ 72~ ~- 1 CITY COUNCIL: ./ 1 REMARKS 5 px k,4 .. 0 BOA: CLOSED: I lt#04 BY: 1 J Â· '- 1 \, O 1 DRAC: PLAT SUBMITD: _j' PLAT (BK,PG): ADMIN: A--pn reL'Â«~ -~ 1 ' 41,11 .. ... CASE NUMBER Al 17-00 PARCEL ID # 2737-074-30007 CASE NAME Kowalick Residence DRAC PROJECT ADDRESS 337 Silverlode Drive PLANNER Fred Jarman CASE TYPE DRAC OWNER/APPLICANT Robert Kowalick REPRESENTATIVE David Pinicho DATE OF FINAL ACTION 11/7/00 CITY COUNCIL ACTION PZ ACTION Reso. #58-2000 ADMIN ACTION Approved BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 1/3/01 BY J. Lindt W I DEVELOPMENT' ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010. "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order. unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement. or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect. excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470. but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Robert Kowalick. 2710 Ledgewood Ct.. Rochester, MI 48306 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Lot 7. Silverlode Subdivision Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property DRAC Variance for Garage Location and Front Door Setback Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Planning and Zoning Commission Reso. #58-2000. 11/7/00 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) November 18,2000 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice ofapproval.) November 19,2003 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 18th day of November, 2000, by the City of Aspen Community DÂ©vflopment Direstor. 6-1 4- .k-4 - /UU n<Jzz> 7 Ann Woods, Community Development Director 10 - . - . PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lot 7, Silverlode Subdivision, by resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission numbered 58 series of 2000. For further information contact Julie Ann Woods, at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. s/City of Aspen Account Publish in The Aspen Times on November 18,2000 nâ€¢ 1 MEMORANDUM To: Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Design Review Appeals Committee THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director<lfe> FROM: Fred Jarman, Planner 5'{~ RE: 337 Silverlode Drive DATE: November 7th, 2000 1 4 //9/30 / .-1 4.0. f/frf \36. 0 -11.-- - - -- -ft Trlf':,(a i ~~ 4...1 -* 971 11 I li. . 9%44.f .er-:r Â·-A -2.1 I ). il -Jl-- U 1 FF + TL -. 12 ' ' 1 1 .~: .. f , f 44. Mt'Er . t It r' - i j g 11-T 1.i 1~ . 11' . * 11 1 11, 01 -jo . / 4 i, . Il , . 1 61, 'eli, râ€¢. 4, , 1.01 , t Â«ur 11111 . . : 5 A.*.,tertr F.** 1 1 Bate/Wilkms'ALA . / i + -Â· C .4...1 1.~~~ , 4 1Â· - I . F + - 3. : 4 . . r 0 44 ./ ..> ..0 + <2 .- ..I + 4â€¢ 4..AE.â€¢ : .9- + .4 4-f .1 + .... 4.Â». - .9.....'/'Al#- APPLICANT: Robert Kowalick REPRESENTATIVE: David Panico PARCEL ID: 2737-074-30-007 ADDRESS: 337 Silverlode Drive, Lot 7, Williams Ranch Subdivision, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. ZONING: AH PUD: Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development CURRENT LAND USE: 12,374 sq. ft. lot containing an existing single-family residence PROPOSED LAND USE: The applicant wishes to construct two additions to the existing house to contain 2 bedrooms, remodel an existing two-car garage, living room, and modify the existing entrance to house. In order to do this, the applicant is requesting variances from the Residential Design Standards for garage location (26.410.040(C)(2)(b)) and front door setback (26.410.040(D)(1)(a)). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant, Robert Kowalick, represented by David Panico, seeks variances from Section 26.410 Residential Design Guidelines for a garage location and front door setback. (See Exhibit A for a description of the specific standards.) The applicant's property is located in the Williams Ranch Subdivision. After careful review of the submitted application by David Panico, Staff indicated to the applicant that that the proposed plans and drawings required four variances from the Residential Design Standards which included a two-stallage, garage location, st!Â£le- story element, and front door setback. Subsequent to the initial submission, Staff -li- conducted a site visit with David Panico to discuss the proposed project in light of the requested variances. As a result of that discussion and site visit, the applicant resubmitted significantly improved conceptual drawings successfully addressing the two-stall garage and single-story element issues. In effect, this application, as a result of the new drawings, site visit, and discussions held with the architect, requires only variances from the garage location and front door setback standards in the Residential Design Standards. .r Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Design Review Appeals Committee, approve the request for variances from the Residential Design Standards for garage location and front door setback, finding that the proposal 1) "yields greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan" and 2) "more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to." RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE STATED IN THE POSITIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. IM, Series of 2000, approving garage location and front door setback variances from Residential Design Standards for a single-family residence at 337 Silverlode Drive, Lot 7, Williams Ranch Subdivision finding that proposal 1) 'yields greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan' and 2) 'more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to. "' ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria & Staff Findings Exhibit C -- Parcel Location and Vicinity Map Exhibit D -- Applicant's Letter A Supporting Plans Exhibit E -- Resolution No..~~ Series 2000 2 EXHIBIT A REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS The intent of the following parking, garages, and carports standards is to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing parking, garages, and carports on alleys, or to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist. The code specifically indicates: b. The Pont facade of the garage or the front most ~ - ~ supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten feet (10' 0") further from the street than the front most wall of the house. 101 j Staff Finding .3 y+ID The applicant' s proposed garage exists forward of the front 1-1 2-f: 1 most wall of the house. This would be acceptable if the lot 3 1 ~ - j \ were larger than 15,000 sq. ft. and the garage were side- loaded. In this case, the existing garage to be replaced is also ,k- x -+ a Â» 5'-+ not setback 10 feet from the front most fagade ofthe house. It is also fully exposed and oriented to the street. The applicant proposes to orientthe proposed garage face to a more perpendicular position relative to the street the residence faces. Additionally, the design of the garage includes a single-story cantilevered roof overhang further obscuring the garage doors themselves and adding to the architectural vocabulary of the residence. Staff finds this proposed garage modification to be a much better design than the existing garage and the added overhang above the garage doors to further mute the garage as a major element on the fa~ade of the residence. The end result is that this garage design approach better addresses the current garage situation. The intent of the following building element 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. a. The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten feet (10'0") back from the front most 31 wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight. Staff Finding 435> The existing entrance to the house is 8 feet back from the front most wall of the building. The N,43 f.Â«49 remodeled front porch entry and door will set the door 13 feet back from the front most wall ofthe / building with the dimensions of the new garage. This / requires a variance from the Residential Design Standards. 3 Staff supports this variance request because the front door is on the second floor of the residence and not seen from the street and does not currently maintain any relationship to the street or enhances the walking experience. The proposed entry actually brings the door somewhat closer to the street and is street facing in design. DESIGN REVIEW APPEALS COMMITTEE CRITERIA a) Yield greater compliance with the goats of the Aspen Area Community Plan; Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposed addition of the garage and location of the front door yields greater compliance with the goals of the AACP and residential design standards. The mqip policy driving the design quality element of the AACP indicates that the community should retain and encourage an eclectic mix of the design styles to maintain and enhance the special fharacter-ofthe-communix.Staff finds that the requested variances_for the front door and gar.age location are designed in a way that bringsthspy.gall desjgn of a residencel that currentidoes-not=mply-*iillthe-standardi_12. fit better with thisllolicyÂ® the AACK anci ~J residential design standards. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 1 %3 / f . 4 b) More effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds 9 toi or Â»J 44' -*-C UP Staff Finding f Staff finds that the garage and front door design and location more effectively address the intent of the standards in the Residential Design Standards. Specifically, the intent of the garage being_*back 1-0 feet-frorn-the-fmnÂ£14ade ofthe hole or forward ofthe fagade if the - Tof-is at least 15,000 square feet in area is better addressed by the new 192tion and defiERf- ~le garage. Thefantilever single-story design over the garage doors effectively shadows the garage doofi and mutes their prominence. The front door standard is intended to foster a relationship to the streetscape. The physical location of the house and current front door maintains no relationship to the street, as it is not seen from the street as a result of the steep grade in front of the house. One has to walk 75 feet up the driveway even to get to the steps leading up to the second landing where the door is located. Staff finds that by the nature of the door' s location on the second level and distinct separation from the streetscape, the proposed entry actually brings the door somewhat closer to the street and is street facing in design. Again, Staff finds that the requested variances for the front door and garage location are designed in a way that brings the overall design of a residence, that currently does not comply with the standards, to fit better with the residential design standards. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c) Be clearly necessary for reasons offairness related to unusual site specific constraints; Staff Finding Staff finds that, although the house is located on a steep slope, the rear bedroom addition will result in a significant hillside cut and the house already contains an existing two-car garage. Staff finds that this criterion is not met. 4 EXHIBIT B PARCEL LOCATION AND VICINITY MAP f C. %\ \ \96 N FR 64 S < 80 9. 322 WE is 1 22 440 rs<S Parcel location of 337 Silverlode Drive. Z.- . 7.6 + ... I â€¢ - : *. .Â·Â· 4. 4//mil"/ ilk-*A' ' â€¢t~Â· 1- 4*s:4.*2::Firl'Ellillilil<QUA:RM"l ilikilifttlik:/1 r' 1 : Â»t . . 11 4.- * -Â· r 7..i . 4. b 'â€¢ . -' .' . /f . View showing driveway onto property in front View in front of the existing residence from the street. of existing residence. DESIGN BY DAVID PANICO INC. Ev, 1 3, i ''Â·, il 1 ' fÂ·,1.i; i Â·ii 'i i i , bit i r.~1 1.4 -~ . 1[ it ~ 1,#. k t. i~ ..0,, i.,~ t ): 8Â£GAI P:FJN,:,994Â·923-5394 F#x 970â€ž923-1 260 September 18,2000 Ms. Sarah Oates Aspen City 7.oning Officer 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado Re: Kowalick Residence, Application for D.ILA.C. Review Dear Sarah: Accompanying this letter is the completed application package to be submitted to the Design Review Appeals Committee regarding requested variances to Aspen's Residential Design Standards. After a brief description of the project a letter of summation addresses each design review standard (requirement 6 of Attachment 3 of the application form). This application concerns additions and alterations to an existing residence in the Silverlode (Williams Ranch) Subdivision. The design of the existing structure was reviewed by 19.11.A.C. in March of 1997 and all requested variances were granted. At the time, Planning Office staff and some Committee members agreed that the design standards (Ordinance 30) were intended ft, the townsite of Aspen and, in many cases, should not apply to these building sites. I hope that these sentiments still prevail. Section 26.410.010 General The requested variances to the Residential Des*1 Standards for this project are consistent with the intent to preserve neighborhood scale and character when you consider that the Silverlode area can be considered it's own distinct neighborhood. Fourteen of the fifteen free market, and all of the 11/0 building sites have been developed on a steeply sloping hillside along curvilinear streets. 'llhesc two conditions alone meant that when these homes were designed the majority of them needed, and were subsequently granted, variances from some design standards. Ofall the building sites fronting on Silverlode Diive, this lot has the most difficult site conditions. In addition to the fact that it is the steepest lot, it's building envelope averages 30' above Silverlode Drive (sce accompanying photos) necessitating massive retaining walls and a driveway that barely meets Aspen city driveway slope requirements. Additionally, the envelope, on it's downhill side, is defined by a 20' tall boulder retaining wall (see photos). When you consider these facts you will understand that die bigst determining factor in how this design evolved was providing a serviceable dtiveway and reasonable access to the garage. It is also important to keep in mind that much of what the Residential Design Standards attempt to address is the strectscape as it is viewed by auto or pedestrian traffic. The Standards reference desired perceptions of, and interactions with the character of structures when viewed from fronting streets. The unfortunate aspect of this project is that it sits at the top o f a 20' tall boulder retaining wallhmiting any interaction to a "worms eye" view of the residence. For this fact alone many of the design standards become irrelevent Section 26.410.040 Residential Design Standards A. Site Design 1. Building Orientation- 'Ihe original D.R.A.C. approval allowed part of the front fagade of the house to be skewed from perpendicular to tangent At the time the Committee acknowledged that this angle was necessary for ease of access to the garage and the need for turning and maneuvering space in front of the garage. '1'he proposed addition to the left front fagade of the residence is an extension of this existing skewed element. Consistent with the original design this element is secondary to, and narrower than, the min fagade o f the house to it's light. 2. Build to lines- The proposed addition will bring more than 60% of the front fagade to within 10'-12' of the front setback But, due to site conditions previously mentioned and the fact that the actual setback line sits a quarter of the way down a boulder retaining wall this standard cannot be met. 3. Fences- No fences are proposed. 13. Building Form- The design of the existing residence was meant to mimic the shape and scale of two miner's cotta,s. The existing structure and proposed additions are broken into massing dements of the scale and form typical of cottages that probably existed where the house sits today. 1. Secondary Mass- This standard applies to new structures only. C. Parking Garages and Carports- The steep site and the fact that the driveway needs to gain almost 16' in elevation in a distance of 110' is the strongest determining factor in the location of the Garage. This fact was acknowledged by the Committee in the 1997 review and hopefully should apply to this review. 1. Alley Access- 1)oes not apply. 2. Road Access a. Along the street facing fagade, the living area is 38' long, the garage is 22' long, thercfc,re meeting this design standard. b. Due to the site conditions described above this standard should not apply. c. 'I'hough the lot does not exceed 15000sq. ft. the garage doors will be nearly perpendicular to the road. d. Does not apply. e. The vehicular entrance width o f the garage is 20' thereby meeting this standard. f. Due to the narrow access side of the proposed garage the design can not accommodate single stall doors. D. Building Elements 1. Street Oriented Entrance- The main entry door to the residence is facing, and perpendicular to, the street. a. Due to the location of the gari, and the need to adapt the proposed additions to the existing floor plan this standard can not be met b. An entry porch meeting this design standard is part o f the design. c. A street facing window meeting this standard is a part of the design. 2. One Story Element - The garage and the deck that comprises it's roof is a one story clement meeting this design standard. 3. Windows- The windows on the proposed addition meet this design standard. The window on the upper level of the east clement of the existing structure do not but were approved in the original D.ILA.C. review. The Applicant is willing to bring this window into compliance with this design standard if the Committee requires. 4. Lightwells- Does not apply. E. Context- The proposed additions arc consistent with the character of the immediate neighborhood and at the same time respectful of Aspen's design context with the project's reference tc, the Miner Cottage vernacular 1. Materials a. The project meets this design standard. b. The project meets this design standard c. The project meets this design standard. 3. Inflection a. 'rhis desilm standard can not be met due to the fact that the existing structure is comprised o f two story elements extending the full width o f the building envelope. ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name KoNALÂ« RESUDENCE/APPITI 0144 4 3671324-nOF+6 2. Project location .3,3,7 39[Â»/63,2. l.Â©u.E .[iz,c,J jfil2 LOT 7 , H I LuatÂ·44 lart Lit 642Â©1 9 144 ON (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning RUÂ· D. 4. Lot size 12 ; 374* 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number Me--120â‚¬621- kIDJ,444 GIL 2-7 1 0 Lâ‚¬1202.K 14213 61- F.Cr NESTE.2 , 1,4 1 402<3*7 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number DAVID) Par41 6 O 10â‚¬73, JUN! FEE 14Â·111>12Â£2 46135.yq CO. 8>1 tpli 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization X Design Review Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) ExPEfi-ltÂ·{/1 0! MALE -FAPA IL>/ *43â‚¬>I IDIEN /f â‚¬ CROMfillâ‚¬ED OF 28,210 lib OE093 (l'31'* Ii] f tx,IC; BED< DERICE {-166 41*ELE-NOIC)*40 ExID-t-{ FIr, REONNIENAE 1,447 40&1Eor 1-0 112Â·A.C. REVIEld IN MAIZE H OF iri(17 APÂ·112 02511(NED AU- RE@l)â‚¬Â«TED VARANCE,4 9. Description of developmentapplication A NUM %132 OP WHITE Â»WEEÂ» Cf- FAÂ·(33.12_ ~ DOME P.1 11-44+10-/Dtp A\.4 7 1-10MEâ‚¬Ep ON TLHEM , cy[1.-lf:ffip P.] r[-1-1 lijzlel-}(C~ F.E APE-9304TA-(-164,6 OF AM -EXIOTINO 9-1-2Â«ruZE 4-MD frot?SLFC) ADD'iTI (349 Aft.0 ALTER/NE 0'1~Â·t> TO Tf-It-4- 9[2Â«11)06 Have you completed and attached the following? Attachment 1- Land use application form Response to Attachment 2 Response to Attachment 3 1>11><13 6 Ms. Sarah Oates Aspen City Planning Department 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Co. Re: 337 Silverlode Dr., Land Use Application for D.R.A.C. review. Dear Sara, I authorize David Panico (Design by David Panico Inc.,1533 Juniper Hill Dr., Aspen, Co.) to be my representative in regards to this application for design review. Sincerely/~0'~ j Robert Kowalick ( / 2710 Ledgewood Court. Rochester, Mi. 48306 Phone 248-651-6504 WARRANTY DEED 165,00 THIS DEED, made this 01 day of OCTOBER 1998, between ALICE BRIEN OF THE COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF CO GRANTOR, AND ROBERT M. KOWALICK, JR. AND LAURIE J. KOWALICK GRANTEE whose legal address is : 27190 LEDGEWOOD CT. ROCHESTER HILLS, MI 48306 COUNTY OF , STATE OF m 11 WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and confirm unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate and lying and being in 4~ the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows: *~ LOT 7, SILVERLODE SUBDIVISION, according to the Subdivision plat thereof filed for record in Plat Book 37 at Page 3 1111111 lilli 111111111111 lilli 1111111'11111 lilli lili lili 422593 10/01/1998 04:24P WD DAVIS SILVI 1 of 3 R 16.00 D 155.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for himself, his heirs and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, his heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing delivery of the presents, he is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect. absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simpler and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs and asaigils, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the T~ thâ‚¬ply#f~~the si#*fiar, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all whol<or Any part t>â‚¬2of. The singular number shall include the plural, g~hdo#G ' :Â·/ 6:0 2/r -4,~ 31 ALICE BRIEN 'Â·- 1 C 3\Pumuckc, 1 1 ..OF COY / sTATE of A /6 /0,4 1 COUNTY OF 7,4 k,-v ) SS. The .Asregoing instrument was acknowledge~be~re me this /f - day of ~JEPE-, 19 ~ 0 , by ALICE BRIEN WITNESS my hand and official seal Â«LibÂ» my commission expires: Notary PuBttE ~ti~ 1 19 Â°19 069 0 f CE l 3239 755Â»Â» ~ i OF ASF~N ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FoRM Project: AGPITIo!46 4 AL.FrERGTIC:)146 To KEHALI 64- 12.06~DENZE. Applicant: 24YIP Farilco REPEES:ENT~INO 0~36.ET K.OA/AU 01 Location: 8737 9'll,VEÂ£ LCIPE PEJVE- 13/77EN Zone District: M u. e (H 11Â£1604, FANCH t) Lot Size: \2,374* Lot Area: N /A - 0Ef-IMiEP e,7 8 U. P. (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: 4/k Proposed: Number of residential units: Existing: 1 Proposed: \ Number of bedrooms: Existing: L- Proposed: 8 Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: 14-04*Allowa b~588042 Proposed: 5050* Principal bldg. height: Eristing.- 24,Â¢IDMIP,4/lowa ~2~OD MID Proposed: 424.â‚¬ TDy\\P Access. bldg height Existing: Fj/* Allowable: Proposed: On-Site parking: Existing: 4 Required: 2 Proposed: 4 % Site coverage: Exi.~ting: _4~,Â·_6441 Required: Proposed:\1.-8-70 % Open Space: Existing: Required: Proposed: 27. 8'95-INg Front Setback: Existing:_35410Â¥26'<equired: 27' Proposed: 21'TDUE.6 Rear Setback. Existing:3â‚¬TB?Ef, liequired:lfâ‚¬E~2798Â¥\1~roposed: _12 -iME4 Combined F/R: Existing: 10,5' Required: 411â‚¬Â£~46â‚¬ptproposed: (09 Side Setback: Existing: 21*â‚¬E Required: 201 Proposed: 22,4@N Side Setback: Existing: 23' â‚¬H Required. \O ' Proposed: R).56)11 Combined Sides: Existing:43.11 Required: to\ proposed: 317.4 Existing non-conformities or encroachments: NONE Variations requested: NONE (~,De PEFINEP IN ArrwovED fa.PAOVEEMENT-, 1TAR RÂ¥ 774)9 6175 10 2,8816[t} 11= 01AAER- COES 11+2000 H A IC)41 f2*=V I EW 1 ST}teâ‚¬*4(96' fAA, 16 .EquAL lu eoÂ» or THK, AU-Â£*466066+ADO NT, CA 3711-1Â£#. ~ DeÂ£L rkle AÂ·40Â·Eafâ‚¬PN-1- lt>fÂ· ME-71401> t54 HHIO+ Me<IM IJM WE/G 41- le PENE(EMINEP, ./ j im r tO - 7 -- 4 !7 I. / Â£ --1%~3-* .. . 1, \ 4 . h .- 4 1 -* .- - 2----- d i z i mjf- - i 1 -- - , 1 1 i. t 1 -- I li ':1 1 4 J. 1 ' i 1 ' 'i .r is V I, 1 ... 1 i | 1 9 8 1 iv Jpl .9 71415 94to 1~OF- .- HN> Almâ‚¬P : '. 1 1 . 1 - f - =n .2-1 ,- 7--w & 1 11: - 3 li ..i# 1, 1 rviti 4 Â· 1 / '. 1 .-- F Â¥ 'r 1 5 16 ' 4 j . 11; 11 9 - i iiI? 4 . M i i?+ 1- i i . ill - I l; i .i. : r , iNf d 11'i -Â· t.._ 1 I .; . I 1.4 3 .... 1 1 i. ~~,8 f t. f.litts ...' 1 - 1 b, - i-1 1 -1 & $ 16 - li ! , . I k-- 7 '. 1 Â· l i \ , 1*... 60-- p---1 . f -I - - , 7 f-Y -57 5- - 7 -1 7,11 ir - li - I , , i , 1 1 2 ' ./.*." 1 . .... I . - . , 6 01 1 -7 i : . * 5 . 1 . ... .. I . .1 : - , r 1-.---' - --- -1-1- --2 6.-- -4 0 5 - , 1 ... n 1 0.1,.1 i 149 SHEP li . . i EFU~F lie Â· 5- ELEMEAr 914 Q 9 1 5 f I i . .5. > -_ 9 - 3 ' 1 I 2:62:AbE fosiz-- WREP 1 7 0 + 14::2-. i Ii: :11 i . 0 2 , 1-1 -r \ HiÂ»fECrIYE - C.NlyÂ¥.AAEA . I 96 'r - - -1 - 1-2 -- d. D- 1=OÂ»U OK- RED (DE KKE ' Ocr- [t , 200[3 . lo .4 1 10 - t| 1# N 'rbak - : - u V f â‚¬:. 19<1.41 - , - -- ~ *2 4 1 -1 14... '.1 3 2 '00 03:04 PM .esign by David Panico . 4 1)13[1 2< HY t).\\11) P.\\414 :C ) INC 1 1533 JUNIPER HILL ROAD, ASPEN, COI.ORADO 81611 PHONE 970-923-5394 FAX 970-923-1260 Fax d Tb: Fred Jarman From: David Panico Flic. 920-5439 PageR 2 Phone: 920-5090 Date: 10/13/00 Re: 337 Silverlode DRAC CC: O Urgent O For Review Â¤ Pleaâ€¢â€¢ Comment O Please Reply O Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Fred, Take a look at the accompanying perspective sketch. I think the added shed roof elements address the "one story" review standard and they complement the design, I will bring a "hard copy" and the dimensional requirements to the Monday mee6ng, David 4 I aeod OOIUOd pIAoa Fi9 u515 Wd *0:Â£0 00, EI 130 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: ADIPITIOI46 4 AL:[152;410Â§5> TO KEHAU 614 BOA DENZE Applicant: 0*112 9614100 REPBEE-ENT-ltÂ·46 Â¤213â‚¬â‚¬:r K.OWAUOL Location: 8737 91 l,VEÂ£ LOPE PE-1VE- AAFEN Zone District: Fum. IHILLIAMil FANO-1 5 Lot Size: \2,674* Lot Area: hi/A - CEÂ·pINEP eâ‚¬ FU.P. (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: NA Proposed: Number of residential units: Existing: 1 Proposed: \ Number of bedrooms: Existing: 4 Proposed: 5 Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: \404~ Allowa b~30813* Proposed: 150!50~ Principal bldg. height: Existing: 2-45%*424/lowa~?~6'TD PBO Proposed: 94â‚¬ 1Dy\\P Access. bldg. height: Existing: 13/A Allowable: Proposed: On-Site parking: Existing: 4 Required: 2 Proposed: 4 % Site coverage: Existing: 14-654 -Required: Proposed: 7\,_839 % Open Space: Existing: Required: Proposed: 27.13'roSTAIE Front Setback: Existing:-lz@G'TOFLitiequired: 21' Proposed:__'-3_~ropE,1 Rear Setback: Airisting:315'10 FE#_Required:114Â£~33'â‚¬krroposed: -72490 fiES Combined F/R: Existing: 10,51 Required: 42â‚¬6. ~A~RK,Proposed: 4,22 Side Setback: Existing: 22.1*E Required. 20 ' proposed: 224@34 Side Setback: Existing: 23Iâ‚¬,4 Required: lo' Proposed: 19-r F$â‚¬2\ Combined Sides: Existing:49Â·f Required: to\ Proposed: 311.4 Existing non-conformities or encroachments: NONE- Variations requested: NONE (~be PEFINEP IN Amzovl3(> FL{.PPOPEEMBNT, FAK. fÂ©F- TH)9 5,le- 10 2'88541 r ot,41462- COES 11+20(JO H A 1041 FEVIEW, 0-ri-YEÂ£14 10E ' fAA. 16 MUAL -10 EC?b Or T+1.Fy.ALLÂ£314650:E-AMOUNT't Cg ~Di Ill:~. ~6726 Mu,[2 AMBEebâ‚¬BN.r lt>rK MEJ-tÂ·+02 8,7' MHIC.HÂ· Ht:*IM UM 1.-1Â£10 +fE 14 PR713{21}4 INEP. I li -. 340224 - - i Ak ' V tt .2 441, 9, 're,~ t. ; 4-1-. . -- .29.--e M h. 1. ta-. . A 6 ., 1 P . r. i. r(... <No. ~4 A > DATE NOV -t,co TIME 430PM 6,49?forte; 214 r PLACE AeÂ¢WN arru*u. P 2URPOSE D.K.A C. REVEW ...'.0~47& - 4 . 5..4/. L1 rn 9., 33- S,Nert,45 119-10\ County ofPitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATION State of Colorado } SECTION 26.304.060 (E) I, EN/1 1-3 fÂ»11 CO , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060 (E) o f the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of properry with three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated On the attached list, on the day of . 199- (which is - days prior to the public hearing date of )~ 2. By posting a sign r a cor.spicuous place on the subjec: oreces (1 k could be seen .. from the nearest public way) and thar the said sign was oosted and visible coninuously 1 1 from the '~~TI-~ Hay of LAL<F .4~(>{ust 'be posted for at lei<: zen (10) fun days before the hearing date). A photog:mph of che rosted sign is aruched hers:o, \flftfialâ‚¬~*~) Signanre (Attach photograph here) Â· Signed before me this "0~ day NON MomErrbv bkv' P 83\1160 WITNESS MY HAND.AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: cl~ l Â£3~-3-CX:)2~. ta#en EreA E-liqi.*Â« No)ary Publin -9*OA. Foo-4- Â§40/-Â»n Notary Pubiic's Sig:nature . 2010 --* 1 C 801 IA --- --*---- . f / / 1 iII . - // % 4-7% UN â‚¬060 0 . / f KO fosED Built>IN# 44 AD D 11-1 0 KE ENVELOFS -4 9 d g -- EX leT [114 t. . - . ~ RESIDENCE < 4-h / - FROFEATY LIN â‚¬ 4 1 Se*BED --*-/L- - ........0+0*/221/5/) CLY . - 09 .1 4 f L_-ZA /4.- I , L , e , .-. --C- Ce/8151144 E=H - EX 1*n NC . . ' . 0 e 1 - ~ , Ex 19>1- 114 6 ' P R 13/ EWAY 1 - - Z â€¢, r < -â€¢ .-- - .. - C L__~____ .. f, I. .. ---- . . li 0 - E - . \~ 1,1 4. , 60 I . I .5 . &30 EXCOTING DOU LDEK C&1136144 t - 4. 1.-f b , 0 -1 4.N \41 5-I----~F --r-- f34 .,1- - . -----77-2 , 1 -- - \ Nida I NOIEIVAA 0101 'NgdSV AIM HaOU~AUIS LE L- * '31 f...t- ~13 A \6. 1 t ./ TE 4 I / ><\ 1 1 7-\ CRCABLL â‚¬;pÂ·ACE: 3~V)Â· 01 ./ AL N .9 -/ 1. 1 ....R, . 40 43 1 .. -I Y + f 0% / /7,1, 9Â»/ 2 *~Dqf724 41- Of 49/ 2-33:u4100 Â¥*4\DEACE ___f, , Ut /4 4 AE*~ff L* *417 ~~A 4.<abiL__ledfit' W I j L \9/ , .\44=17>, / . 2/.41,6 -Â»4 i 1 , /4 / 2 f *31 Â·Â· 1 1 .1 0/ 1/ UP\<f ~q /4 h %74, . 1 63'c *221Â», c" 2 . 7.1 i I I - I . .ly , 1 1-9-Â»/2 6 4 1. E U 9 PAC E- 1 1 7- Â»04/ I I /...... 3 <4 ,V V /7 ' \4 :/ 1 / j l . r - 4 lf/ 2 \ 1.-- % . . NK / Â·. / /32\ . PA ~ye / ~61*Kleger \I /.Â· J A f. 1/. ~ '406Â©44/:5 /' 9.. dv ,--7- , , V 4.2 Â».1 , 94 7 9 fit 1 - .4,Â»9/0/ 7 lot. .' .'.... .'..' .# . 1~' Er.<.3 *f~*A ~'14-7E ~-&11 U.- ----~f '7, \ 'A /3. ~.411 27 /9 ' m . AkEA or f 01//3.4.-4,4 .3 â‚¬ ~ , , , d '/'-- I L'* ' . Wk Â· ./ r.ff--1 . '743 -- /7 /-\ , 1 17. 46' - APP\TI 0 84 Â¥ \ A/. 3,4 .11 Pul A /407 / 1 J' 1 / g. .A r a., 1 42, /# 4/ 11 \ NN ' I + /,4, 09'--1 Â»E \ A' g 1 .,4 / ff <vo~'90 - 44 /' f -,5 9:77\ 4, \ 7 1 ./ 5%99:7?vt â‚¬ ' X . . U.. 9 11 \ '' j. PS il I' Â·2' f .3/ . 4319> = W. r.61/ t. :. ' I. 2. T i 1 LLA,L Y /4/3 2â‚¬ /Ft d 10/, Uy /' 99 I 71.O,1 0l pr Y ., I I 13.'4% S. ,\.14 ~ .~ 't -i' 0/1 ..11 ly .1 < t #D. , \ . al ... * \4.1 -X ....1 X . 'A, 4,1 11 1.iL 1â‚¬3. Â·./.2 Â» \ . i Â·J ! Â·Of 0 14 19. i \\ P 1 * ix '4 1 9-'= 713 ] / A A / Â£ \ U N.\N 1 - 0 A . \ .1 / P 1 '- ' / .4 , 1 Â·*4 " ' i \ 7. . H- / ' 4 . , 20 .y It . ] 10 @ ~ ?27 2 -- t1l '1,1 - ...1 r - 1 41 't \4 it ~\ 9 11 4~ M B,Â·34,1, kc,Â·rp ..1 34~\ Â»4 I il Â©Et.) FLZPA.1 3 e 1.< 4 1 '14'.,f - 11 I ./ /,7- -. , 1-1 \ , 't. CoAKA,St / M'-2.Â·4342Â¥p-kh-., 1 3 9 1.7 1 - J, ==La. 1 h 1 94 ./. , 74 i / ; 4 .. IIi \.-J4 //, 4 9 / , \ 1 ..:.<4 34> .9 . /. 1 Â»/ i 1 M. /[t r..4/ 1 ho / r.. I. . 4Â· â€žâ€ž f 0,2 0/ ./, \ 9, y 1 1 1 /1 /4/7*AA A, r'/ < 1 4/ 91' 24.11-%42~ " .' ' NÂ». 0 , 199 .264\ / .4 - ' ' 1 **//4&* 031$4445.. ,-4Tf#._ ._.4 _29â‚¬--44'~ 124Â·42. 04/ I , / b/ .-9 -l .,. %, 41) 0/ ,~ 8 I -/ ..Y< I , ..4 ~10\ i / i \\ N ./.9 , 3 \~ Y I f ,~t:I- ~~-4. 1 / 47/ ,Â·\1\ : 4/ / d, 177 / 4/ I Â£> 0. 22/4- 3 0 * 49 // : / 1 -3/1 /9.4/,6 4 46 4 --r./ 1 - -, 1 + hs., r 111 \. 2-.,94/7- hol.2 2 7 T* / PROPOSCD LOWL K CEVE L FLA 14 /. 1/ell c i soIl -' /. CL ADDITION TO KoWALICK RESIDENCE 337 SILVERLODE DRIVE, AsPEN, COLORADO 4,5 E.1 L 1 \ N 2.1 1\ X , ' AVJ 44 (0< l412 4> 1 1 - tv:, 12 \2 LiZ 9 i , 00*43 / . 1 /41 // Â· 1 : 12- i \ 1 //1 1 El N. ~PeE" 11 1 le 7 /1 tH*461 4 ty// 0,- ---d;v,+.--Â·.-- ft rut 47 14. 1,2.1 11 47:11 . 12~>5*1"1 5..Â· lit IL / 1/ 1 . 4 lÂ» ' 11 ! 1 2- TPAH . 8 / -- 24= 1 / M . . 1 12'./L J Z '. te- 1 r- (Ensft) (12*14549 1 h FROPOSEP Koof PLAN 1. j Â»1/413 -1 . * KE *MAL MAettre, ... .- 2 44 ./403*222:. ,---dr_ors-- â„¢*J . ,..ale, LAVÂ·DNÂ·\, , >244\ // 1. ... 7 1 7-- 43: W... 1 / V. f>54 r -- --- 42. .9. 419 \6. FOOT PKINT Of / 144 ~ fl~ ,Â».4 /b.34/ f \\\4\ \4\\ fi}Stert NO KE61 PENCE .' 4 0' 34.1 1, -O. -1.. ..f I Â«444<*U-f 1. 7 . 94'~M A.- 1 - 1 6,- u - 7 \\ .1 ter / , g.uji - 0/ 14 f F f /Â« 1<<FR:11Ehl . Â· 0 t . 1 1 L . /..It 7 \\ 07Â« . . I \\ 4 . --P. .1 -4.-7, i tm \:11( / 1-7, . y 4 . 11231 m Â· / ees-ax=*4 -4 . / ~.i \' C>w h y 1-74. . \/7 . t--1 ' ' 1 / 1.2 ~ /7 , 7.& / % 1 //297 ~ r ./.17 . . / Ip ' i~'- *1- ./,/12) . 9 b/<7 ' 73:ZE=2: I. 7-~71 A V. 1 1 , 1 A 2 * 2 h i Â·' LI..,i'~lfa-=529 ~ e L e-b7-,-1 ~ M.7 . .. . ' - #Â« 1 - 4.1 1\ 5/ /.'.-3-~ 1{..~'24~3% *t~â€¢ 4 .1-â‚¬3.- -1'- 9* 11 AÂ¢LEA OF 2 '996/ I- 1 i 442: \ 9 ,- 1 . -t- F- , Abpl TteNS ' -'4.QÂ¢y % ifi; , I 1 2. ,49 4. 24 N /./Oe . I -- - ~- ~Â° 301 4 '. C<14.1 1 /A# 7- p - b ly#/ + \%7 . 4 12 ; It g Â·0 *.>< 1% :1 . ' I f j â‚¬ p .. \\9: , 6'. 7, 44.72. -~\ .7/.4>49( \ 1.-,-41 p. 1.- 1 494 1 /7 , r . e,/Â« 11 W A /4 / 11 4 . V '' A - ile 1.- . 'E 1.- ..r &1 1, 44/1 4\ . 1 1 . ..=4.4 11 :2 1' d i V +4 1 1 -0 .//4 7 + N 1 10 : Â«\ d ' 4,2>54,/- 9 ' . . i , U , 4, \ ; f L.. i 1 P / LIV W,6 Mgoi / r \ .1 1 i .~wanÂ·z_u.s z _ p,- 4 bÂ«Â«TE< lt- 44 , 0-2.51:s>M ' i - Â· Â·wÂ· Â· 6'121.-1.1:L , . -- uic_j . . 171- - -- I Pi" ' il g: - 1.:.1 li Ilil 11 437 I /11 44 , 1.1 ~'~ 77--. -ill , , St '.1 1., A 1. 0 22 i . CL-3...1 64/ .f , /4 1 V 1 )& 1 : 0 . 2 4 1 4 4 " ~.1 . /.24 7 -13 ., - "62.. ' J ' ./2/4 Â¥ .. 1. it I U ,{ff.... 11 1 : /6 . 1 24Â· 939. / ..1. 6. 4 . ,/ /Â»44Â¥ A 1. \ 1 4, 4 h../ hÂ¢<4... ect.2-- -4 -,---1 4 . g. / .4. 2 1 .2 1 3224\\ G '7 0 , . 0 *412\ hi \\.- .%0/h f-% 7,7 2\X \ 1 y h 79/* ../ 441 k 4,#1:93, . h. r 45,Â· 1 11 ' i,47 Â©'(JidÂ·y ; . '~ LA f \<~~~..; Â·6 1 /// \1\ 7 ...9 4 . , 2 41 i, * 434< 1111 ..1 - -/A 1 6 // 41/ , n , ~ - ~,/253---- ---- 0 L ~Ii . . j)/ L.Â· 1 7 *4,29 * :4 . v '07 . 1 .1 1 P i ,/ , ->4>~lf <i/ 1. N 4 / hui ,\. 1 7/\ .0 // ,/Â« I- q~~ , -'~ ,~ 1~~11'42 2 0 A. Â» / /''V -24>(41///' 23>~232 --1 - \.-6 237 ./. . I .Ast.. \ -749 ... 4 1 / - .4/ / 7 ru Ne, 20 -1 1 94- / % 4. /..Ir./ '<Ct.Â·' # F.9. 7 1 \. L N '14 ! - 1 61 / y / 2 1 . Ut/ 4,04 4~J---2F* , 1+ PROFO5ED UPPER LEVEL f LAN. 1/011= 1,-01' 7 0 - b ADDITION TO KOWALICK RESIDENCE 337 SILVERLODE DRIVE, AsPEN, COLORADO \ 2Â« M. puh 81 it l . 05/ 1 i 1 A th-\ -, OUT-INâ‚¬ 4 Fxiera Brlf 941 /7 4 1 Â»25357 i I : 1 / --4427' A -- Iii/.1 wt1 / h r ti li 'j:1 1 1 . 11 T 1 1 - 11 1 1 / 0<.ieÂ·riN.5 425Â£>E 1 L--2- 1-7 ' L-- 91*83 1 - 1 11 1 - - --1- 1 NOKTM E-LE.vAl-I ST-05-W--Â»-2----'1 , Â¥:A F-9 0 Fest/1/ p. I M 4% 1 1 1 171 /'' Ath 4,4,2 41\\\ 111 11 i I i d ./2 ~ [fitÂ·~.~. , \ -9 \t. ~ 1 1 \*XI 1 - f ............... A \ ' 4 7 / 3 1 3.'\ r- 1 \ t.====-*=-..- , \9'6-- al. 9 --7 i .~.-'--7-- Â»-4 v....... C 1 1 1 1 ill l 1 Ill 1 1 1 1 11 9 - 1- 11 1- 1 11 9--- 4-- 7--Â» - -- + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HOKTH.EAST ELEVATION.r PROPOSED -_ 1/4.=1 401' F ADDITION TO KOWALICK RESIDENCE 337 SILVERLODE DRIVE, AsPEN, COLORADO t-1- 1 /4 . 1 , 1 , 'fr' - 1 n q,5 111 11[m'll 1 TIle* MNL?*6 1 1 1 1 1 - lili Â» 11 / ' 2-50UTilâ‚¬.AST ELE-VATIC)NI - PROFOSCD th.~ . -2>...2 341 fl::bl ~. tf-#*4%---2-% t-Â»-rn ___ -__.__ ~w \221-*--1 7 - 1 Â·1 p IT]III 2 9---2 ---- j _ -v) ._r.. f-,rerltu, Â·Â·LFLOt-2 2 WA UÂ¥8314, - L mhevE EX@I U.L~ - ' -- . -â‚¬,MINATE-â„¢25UP EL -Ii . ,/ --------- - 1 .- - â‚¬ / 1 1 ' . r-7 -~ 1_.... - ~ Eet'Â©42 T L..tu 1,0' ft*FE #4.4 Â· Ill, , 4 14_ 7-, -- r 11 2 [*El , I-*171 ---. F I , eye 4, F i , Â·71)44 N IN!~4 i, Â¢1119 !' 0,1.v 4 9,1, r:,1 *w O*ir)Â§4 L-*11- i -1 + *lt) #M F lâ‚¬ 1 1 lili , 1 -- . - * '- -%~-4,~.-.... t 1 1,L__1' il 4 1. d' 1 6 - lillit 1 -. il-E ----4-.~ 1-Â· 111.1-04Â·OMIP 4 F.EMOM + Â· 1 31 ' ' 1- L I &110410'1084 ---_-__ - - ____-7-1 ... - 1%,0 14Â©Ce 1.1 _AT..l &3 .4, UltiO ]4214 -- .~__ L +--1 1 e 2 -- r VT- Â·~ -i 7 1 j - 021 86 311 9-2---I--- OrE-+Fe - - ' Â·Â·, ...fÂ·---....1 k. 1 04 -L .... ........ 1 1 Dne .Â£ L 7 - - 11 N / 1 11 Â·- 6,01 0 (5110 2411 U,Â· 1-- -I/n *Ill) 141 --E--'/ 1 47l---=- "-= N b 0 - 1 1 ...Â· * L. "-2 0 -'lod-=~ d 2. p - 1-,IED'-d'Totump-4 - 1-~~.~.I-I - - ~24) i 3 0 ./ ,7 - .Cor - 57 ..tr -*-'Â·i =r-1 1 Z-i.*-1.- %. d - 1. 3=43-9.- 1 1 !' I 1 ..L 1 1 Â· 4Â·-ti -- 2- --- --4 --4 --- --- -- --At-1 -- --- --- - -'--.----- --' --- --- - ---- - -r-.-7 -----E..CaLL...EFUCKE~IU---2-~ZAOEOCEQ.-~ t Â·- - ~- Â·Â· .--2-10/ Ya/Vi//Â· ACC WTNOOJ,45AFE- 0'r fa.LA H INDOki <GOÂ· - .*PRZE CL+00441-LHINO *EX,STINd) 4/Low EZ-<1#ZINA ~~ NOTE-kÂ·111Â®CH Â»,IANARONâ‚¬7 1*frfeNTHele *ca.e<}4nNâ‚¬.4 1 --. .-- . 1 ADDITION TO KoWALICK RESIDENCE 1.1 %4 + -9 i 01,1 Â·,Flarb'yWE, .. --I - - --- TEN .-Â·-Â· - - _-FO{81- 02 Hift;46,7< LMI. 7 21. ..Z-- -t---- -=----- -- _-GE,-229F--EW,AD.$#,---h----9--zE-------2-EEEÂ» Â·r-- 14--1 9 .=---= -- Rof CON)1108 -1 /1 =-1 I - j ,il N - - - -- - ------- ~-- -.73 . -2--6... 4 Â·th 8511,Â·Â¢+ Pwle . 11 ./ 1 : *\ h : \ --- 10/00 120Â·"af --- al-- .I 1 64'.43 + ( 1 liLL'. 4 9 3--ItiGEEE-ZE . - .; N.. 1-31 1~~112- , 11 G 1 U .11 i.1, r-p ~ , N, 11 1 ~ -41 4411 1 a, &//1 1.11*2.11 1 IF-- ' 1 L : 0- .. . - ' 12Â· ew, 1-0 - /, 1 4 1[124*1 | FooÂ·21-15Â·11 *1 76 1 i -_ L 160:41 1.-'. 4 141{ .â€¢ 1 1 IlleÂ£.241*Â·011-3Â· ill ll; 1 1 1, 1 1 /11 - 11 1 11 lilli\Nt 41 111 /11 il 1 1 i 1 11 1 1,1 N' 101 i .4 1 1 9 50Â£.*2 Â»0 8.AmEN il 1- 1 1 1. 1 111 '11 1; / 18/ ( / 'll:. L___1 2_11 -7- o. FLYNCX50 1- ....~~-22/..,- 2-:--*Fr,2/-1 -.Lib- :--T -~ - 2242 ~ $2===--791 1 ! k ..1-!1Â·',0" - -------t==-=- - -7~- .....-. , .... "- - ----....... - . ----* .- 1:- ..... . --,- \ - -1--.-1,- r - 11--1+-- --- 2 r f'!.2-I--t---c*,zÂ·Â·Q"~9%4Â£5---411 , -. ---_,~--->pap*aff/--2--1 -~3_ u --'2442 . -- - .: H---4 _.___ _1_ _-----k ~JI :---f~ 1- -7-â€ž 1 -I.2*-. w -1 CNn.-2 , n==~=Â¥=========~Â¥=.====t MÂ·Â·~FeAM. , PNINCON | 1 111 'Â·11!r.-------111~-7111 : 1 ,-- -- - 1111 { 1'1 111 I 'li Y . r.-W . - 1 -- | e.xlerÂ·1 Kia Auc &-7* --â‚¬ 1/Al,6-14 le JeetÂ» 4 F 1 l. 1 00 10<14 641* -1 . 1 â‚¬/ 1 -reÂ»VS Lâ‚¬PNT;Al.Â£06 : 11 1\ 1, 31 /1 1 x 1 ME,MaeRK j 1 11 1,119 -1,~ 0 f -41 L-----1 F----21 Ill'. 1, , 1. / 1 -i. .......~- 1 11 411 . 4/. 1 t--#------------- - ---= ' __ILLI 120*02 40606. 1 02.1-0. . ! b.. . - -41 , -O 0. FACDO :, -rt E-1 4 1 't-Tr----a i 1 0, 1 1 0 , so. 6010.(0 8521,1 ! -----4 : 1 1 11 Mt - 21 1 1 . . 1. \00& 0. t.4.----Â·Â·Â·- ----- -- ----------- - ---1 Â·M------------------I L----1 1, 1 1 0 \Â« Â» 1.- - ---- -- - ---1 0 0 U 7 N 5 A ST E L EVATI O N ~ - eDu TH N B e T ELEVATION 944-11 P t~- OIl - %... ., 4 0 7-1 It 1 - , FLUFFE-F~ /tÂ»--AA BY - i'* 197 . 6111 - 7 f..8 9% 18/ leF'UAL-lr â‚¬Ul I NALE" 1 \\\1~\ .14-AIR- 414 2 +4/166* -h, il \ 3 DAVID 11 1. 7 U 2- p,er'Ual-r 4-tiNALL 4 NA 57 PAN I C O 1 * c>,4, 8004Â¢7 ,&.go EarrEN INCORPORATED i' ..1 L 7 teMZ-Â£7 6.0 PATTE+1 \ .Â·ff- ---Â£-pÂ·A~,sm&p PHONE 970 923 5394 // FAX d i{ c F-F. -.*,I--. -.-.... -..2 1 1 11~ g 1 - 970923 1260 - Merbl-pCOWZNO | BOX FÂ·3 n ! 1>14.14.1 1 ?JI 1 11 I ASPEN COLORADO < *M.2 Â»107 83)~rEN 81612 1- 11 .1 1 =METAL.- fL.M.Â¢ N.Â£5 1---- - 1 ' 1- 18)4411,~ 60â€¢~P~ 1 11 - 1 1 2 11 1 -// 1 I 11 1 -- 11 1 1 111 -0.---~ 1 1- 111 , _1 - Id _ -1- -r - - - - 7 -4 e " L Iii Â· 1-- 11$,- --- 1! 1 ELEV 1 lili L. 1 DATE OF ISSUE FEEZUAW 28, 1441 . REVISION' DATES 1 1 1 --- 1 - 1--_-----4------------------------------- ---- ---6 --t # -1 -1 1 . oPIEET # ~ --- A-3 i NORTHEAST ELEVATION . 1 - [Und 1 t r R _ --- ------7 -- -1~ ~ 1 I 0 , 7 -5, A 7 / 1 11\\ ... \ , 1 1 \>' 1 '8.;454, 1 7/Â« /4/0/ f ~ %. \\: i i - 4,4\ f / / @Â§h , O W- 111 ike . , .i, 11-4" 93 V 19,1.3.lkâ€¢ 10 /10,1 , a (CAH & 59/>66 ' ~ ~~-5~< , '9% . 29 Or /22( ! 4 1 \1 , 4. 1 , ' 1/ Off / 1 .21 .'th'0.// / / .F#Â£8 13&~,7 \ M- FEÂ·OFA (22*L / ,/r 1 1 ./r .3. i q MUREZ,Fu\BODM 2 2.' ~ .2 Ik .-7 4 1 -0 1 Ir-lr-r ' 1 ' -4*1 69, Eâ‚¬86Â£ I . !1113 -----~ill- * 6- -- U-71 - ITt=. 4 1.4 M 4 \ 9 , k. A 1 PArt-1 ZO : 4- 141 //7 0 1 ..1 . 1 ~ ~~ CKAN L 9750= rf : /,r / Â« Ilk- - 4 - A-' f~ 14 24,1 ; IY 2- f / 1/37 1 -1-25% A / 94 24 1 1 pe 91 1 1 , 1% -#.-~~ 1/17 4 1 lj; 41 2 Â·?\ DC- / /2/~ j 1~1* f/>-7.1 --~~_1~\f~ 1 1-JEJal_â€žM 1 1 fl , 1 41 1 0 9Â·Â·AU< / d , A?:Â«31 744 0/ .11 7 2 104>- ' Â·'1 C _ _-124 211 1 * f e ht.*. s, i <tk-4,4' 2~4Â°T'> 2 4 C @3* Â»4.Xf-/,f--'j. 7 15//~~''.1-1 MA+TEK *AP-ob,1 9 wn// i,q Â· .1411 1 uu. E- 1 a*~ L p.*iu~. _. vj.: )Mo 0 0444 1 '11/ 01*11 r< 4 1 - 1 4 4 1 94 / 11 . .3Â£ fw#L"e@y#.;. /0=2=~ I 1 / 2%3447,6 07( .4 -- B~7723_-I]~F Ir 7 = 4- . ...- ~.ir).t- . A)/ YES,abÂ· d" \*449 Â¢ 1 1 1347 / 41.2 6 =71eÂ·Â¥00/ 9*atjj- I 4 14 ~ hem**FI %'AP 46. 1-;10 1 1/ %43 ' 0/ 4Â£-140'--1.61 U 7, v \ 1/ / 'PatoiDE!4\ *0 0;,teE. 26,/7 ' iw.--*bu 1 / - 19 _ffIFfIELF-Pa.Pl~ 4 - 34*/, \\ \\\ PIN INAT Am-EA 1% IN ..\\ 4, 47- *4,4/,4//4. /E ATEX r.=.r:-# I jr :1 \ : LY Â· 1% L-4) Off: ' L.y~7 + 3 -- /4%9/* 1Â«,24 1, /4/4/, . f---n - M /4/ 944 \ 1 L /12ti -44/ / * N,&)4;;* 7444 *.. 31 .,0 #aN]> 4250D ' DESIGN[ \ INA - /0/ M '' 4/9,1 :V Â·7%7040...hy<Xeitf L / 1 4 . n.*> â‚¬ 14(SCO ~ , f ' 1/ , f~ r' ~ ~~ 110 yi,~-A ,%3X 7 4 34* /7/%4 ....., 'e~ - , ' 3< BY .1 .e 4- 1 \Uts> / .-10/FIN-1Â»k -.'- 3 *5 Â· 11-41) b 00 / .DAVID v 1 Qi/ Ahâ‚¬ ./<42 : - \Nk i 3/1 4 / DIA... 1 : 2~-Â·; PANICÂ© / Â· ,- '4 g. A 6, B i - 4- 3 *lizk 54 &/f ~~ ' -,- INCORPORATED 1* *#84*4~Alze,I,u our 21& . Â·~ / 13 1, 9/4*4 1 A Q < ft \ .-+IbMâ‚¬*b<LLÂ·~~ 4// / 1 ([l) 1 0 /2 / t / 71 01 1-21 60 1 42. - -= PHONE /660Â¥- 1 /1 - 11 - 1,04_1_â€ž2.4 970 923 5394 I.- 2 r///1.1 , 1 _tNE>LITFICÂ£ 1 ... <~ Â· -~1NS:ll 91 / 970 923 1260 / 8///12 Ril 4 1 1<IL .-7 / %.92.\ /// (927 -m#69*W ~ Lf ... 2.19-1-44.-1 AÂ·@164 '.*amwmet---- 4----BOrmiT 5%,; 4 1 - ' 44Â£640. =1\1 ASPEN CpLORADO .A 1 127 EP k Q..O M .9 3 9- . Nt>~ , --a- --7,-73>{It' 71<#f l ~ 21 81612Â£@h 0 , XI D.- 1-- cy i J ,'73HY ~2 = '1 1~~~~:~ * Â· ~.1,2. p t 90\\10 9 MWK...34!12=tki ! 11' 11, 1 ' \ r,41,1.063.1%1*./ .~F -h I \> ~i 1// 1 '-Nltef 1 ZOf ...4/: .. Â· Â· rw4'1#*%'64241 6 1 P ~ <i B li 0 9 -7 4 4 %1 1.~ 1 / 2:;,Â«... VAT ~ -F*44--tl -kÂ·*6IR / 1 4- 1 44 5 1 \\\6 -42 T . 3/1.--37- --- 1 ,:i i U 4*E.14 1 111'ic" .14..1121, r 4,-o! 'llil = i '1-1,4., 84'i DATE OF ISSUE Â¥i <not < - EE#%0Â«V â‚¬8,2991 R.Vl.SION DATES J 1 1 1 UF /19~ L O1-1 E R . L EV E L /1Â»jupPER LEVEL 94'4=1LOai . 4391 1 SHEET # AS OF 1YHOTIOE) 'NadSV '3AING 31007*IS[Al IS Lee %| . |~ .662, ' 6&(9' EXHIBIT C Resolution No51- DFOUA- (SERIES OF 2000) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTING AS THE DESIGN REVIEW APPEALS COMMITTEE APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES FOR GARAGE LOCATION AND FRONT DOOR SETBACK FOR 337 SILVERLODE DRIVE, WILLIAMS RANCH SUBDIVISION, LOT 7, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2737-074-30-007 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Robert Kowalick, represented by David Panico, seeking variances from Section 26.410 Residential Design Guidelines for garage location and front door setback for a two-story single-family residence located at 337 Silverlode Drive, Lot 7, Williams Ranch Subdivision, Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the applicant's property is an 12,374 sq. ft. lot with an existing single- family residence and located in the AH PUD Zone District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.410.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Community Development Department staff reviewed the applicant's application for compliance with the Residential Design Standards Section of the Aspen Municipal Code and found the submitted development application to be inconsistent with Standard 26.410.040(C)(2)(b) "Garage location" and 26.410.040(D)(1)(a) "Front Door Setback"; and WHEREAS, Section 26.410.020(C) of the Aspen Municipal Code provides that if an application is found by Community Development Department 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 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Design Review Appeal Committee pursuant to Chapter 26.222, Design Review Appeal Committee; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.410.020(B) of the Aspen Municipal Code, the applicant submitted a request for variances from Standards 26.410.040(C)(2)(b) and 26.410.040(D)(1)(a) of the Aspen Municipal Code to the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Design Review Appeal Committee as it applies to garage location and front door setback; and WHEREAS, all applications for appeal from the Residential Design Standards of Section 26.410.040 must meet one of the following review standards in order for the Design Review Appeal Committee or other decision making administrative body to grant an exception, namely the proposal must: 6 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; WHEREAS, the Community Development Director, after review of the requested variances, recommended approval for variances from the residential design standards for the garage location and front door setback for the proposed additions and renovation to the existing residence at 337 Silverlode Drive; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing at a regular meeting on November P, 2000, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Design Review Appeal Committee, approved variances from the garage location and front door setback standards of Section 26.410 of the Aspen Municipal Code as it applies to Residential Design Standards finding that the proposal complies with Criteria # a and # b listed above, for a residence located at 337 Silverlode Drive, Lot 7, Williams Ranch Subdivision by a vote of 44-/ 10 2-4-u (9 - 4). NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, that the proposed variances for a single-family residence at 337 Silverlode Drive, Aspen, Colorado, are approved pursuant to Section 26.410.040(C)(2)(b) Garage Location and 26.410.040(D)(1)(a) Front Door Setback of the Residential Design Standards. Section 2: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on November 7% 2000. APPROVED AS TO FORM: DESIGN REVIEW APPEALS COMMITTEE: City Attorney Robert Blaich, Chair 7 ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk C:\My Documents\Current Cases\DRAC\337 Silverload DRAC\337SilverloadDrVarianceMemo.doc 8