Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20120717 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, July 17, 2012 4:30 p.m. Sister Cities room 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen I. ROLL CALL IL COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public III. MINUTES IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST V. PUBLIC HEARINGS — A. 1260 Red Butte Drive, Residential Design Standards Variance VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. BOARD REPORTS VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: • Ar MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director FROM: Claude Salter, Zoning Officer RE: 1260 Red Butte Drive- Residential Design Standards Variance, - Public Hearing DATE: July 17, 2012 APPLICANT/OWNER: Subject Property: John Collett, 1260 Red Butte LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Stan Mathis, Stan Mathis • Architecture ,; } -` y� LOCATION: �C9 Lot: 2 Gaylord Subdivision. The property is located off 1 * °, Red Butte Drive. . ;. '�',' CURRENT ZONING: R-30, Low-Density Residential, with a PUD o 0OGOU 06: Z overlay SUMMARY: The Applicant requests a variance from the Building Elements Residential Design Standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested Residential Design Standard Variance. Page 1of6 P 2 LAND USE REQUESTS: The Applicant has a single family residence which is currently under construction. The residence is known as 1260 Red Butte Drive. Staffs worked diligently with the architect to meet the Residential Design Standards prior to the issuance of the building permit. The owners are now seeking a variance from the Building Elements requirement, as outlined below: • Variance approval from the Residential Design Standards pursuant to L.U.C. Section 26.410.020.D, Variances. The applicant is requesting variances from L.U.C. Section 26.410.040.D; Building Elements (requiring ...the entry door to face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant is requesting a variance from the Building Elements, entry door requirement for a new single-family home, specifically section 26.410.040.(D)(1)(a) requires, "The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight(8) feet." In September 19, 2007 a building permit was submitted to demolish the existing structure. The permit was issued on June 5, 2011. The permit to build a new single-family home was submitted on September 8, 2011. The plans were approved by Zoning in October 11, 2011. The architect did not request a variance as the plans met the Residential Design Standards. The project is currently under construction. The owners are requesting a variance from the requirement which specifies the location of the front entry door. STAFF ANALYSIS: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES: All new structures in the City of Aspen are required to meet the residential design standards or obtain a variance from the standards pursuant to Land Use Code chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards. The purpose of the standards "is to preserve established neighborhood scale and character....ensure that neighborhoods are public places....that each home...contribute to the streetscape." Specifically the intent of the Building Elements standard is to, "ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the façade, enhance the walking experience and reinforce local building traditions" The Applicant's approved plan has two front doors. One which meets the RDS (residential design standards) and one which does not meet the required standard. The door closest to the street meets all three standard requirements for entry doors. The standard states that, "The entry door shall face the street, be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building and shall not be taller than eight (8) feet." The door is street facing, less than 10 feet back from the front-most wall of the building and the proposed height is eight feet. Page 2 of 6 P3 i The owner's proposal is to remove the door closest to the street which meets the standard and keep only the front door, further from the road which does not meet the standard. The door closest to the street would become a wall. The porch closest to the street would wrap around the garage but have no entry to the structure. Figure 1: Front façade s e a , 3 r ` : t ""i 1 f < ^wr*ia7 ". a.+ yg +tt i:'i€ .�6■1 ca ' 4JL'$ f, ? .. �y `if ,, ,Off. ,,CO3,,,,, r a if'+� d9 Door that meets the Standard • (Closest to street) 2"d Door(further recessed) Page 3 of 6 • Figure 2: close-up of door which meets the Standard(door closest to street) ' jtt z - "�-''t';.. -.>- am Ste'" (E -a' I hip ''' t -k I r2.1 xn. TAB ,.t.:.1 - - - 0082g02©12 0©:UT a _ , There are two review standards that the applicant is required to meet if the Commission is to grant a variance from the standard, Section 26.410.020 (D) (2): a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Comments: Staff believes the requested variance does not meet review standard `a' because the proposed door is not consistent with the locations of doors in adjacent structure and in the broader vicinity. The recessed door appears to be out of character with the neighborhood. The Red Butte neighborhood includes assorted building styles, including vintage 70's, ranch style and contemporary timber/stone veneer. The neighborhood is predominately single family homes. The proposed entry door does not promote a pattern of development in the neighborhood. The homes adjacent to and in the vicinity of the subject property have entry doors which are the closest element to the street. In many cases the entry door and porch are the first element off the driveway. The proposed door location, further back from the street is not an appropriate location given the context of development in this neighborhood. The variance request does not meet the review standard `b' as the site does not have a site- specific constraint. Page 4 of 6 t Figure 3:photographic representation of adjacent structures in the neighborhood. Subject property = . P5 r SINN r •1+65 ., , 0 s rn r - 1 44 3 1 ,.- S ,,,� _ ' 1445 a u r f � t 1 'T V~ �S ] 1300 ''.,. 1410 i. , =nA, iI!*4";01,;.; Y'' ''' \10;tori.,,rat,1* . „ .. .. . • 1 .-^' Tom_ jti; f, `' 41,. J • 1V� � • t L 4_ a 1 1250 r �. L+..-7 ni / - . J``•• - 7�' � !,.' ,,' /220 �' f .. �c Safi •¢ }, .� .y:.- ,3 .,_� t 4.. /20y.5 �'u:, '11P). '-,,, � S] .tg `tA.a,:j '�.,,C i/ 7,1195 �6;t .,•, • iE ? ..fife ` _ • apices G sv� —� -�� 1 5 it .. .. • P 6 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the request does meet the variance review standard, noted above that are set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.410.040 D, Variances. Staff recommends denial of the request. RECOMMENDED MOTION(ALL MOTIONS ARE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to disapprove the application for a variance Resolution No. , Series of 2012, disapprove a variance request from the Building Elements requirement of the Residential Design Standards to have an entry door which is more than ten feet back from the font-most wall of the building. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Staff Findings Exhibit B: Application Page 6 of 6 P7 Exhibit A: Staff Findings Section 26.410.020 (D)(2): Residential Design Standard Variances a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or. a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding: Staff believes the requested variance does not meet the review standard `a' because the proposed door is not a supportable design given the pattern of development and considering the relationship of the adjacent structures and the broader vicinity. The recessed door appears to be out of character with the neighborhood The Red Butte neighborhood includes assorted building styles, including vintage 70's, ranch style and contemporary timber/stone veneer. The neighborhood is predominately single family homes. The proposed entry door is not consistent with the pattern of development in the neighborhood The homes adjacent to and in the vicinity of the subject property have entry doors which are the closest element to the street. In many cases the entry door and porch are the first element off the driveway. The proposed door location,further back from the-street does not meet the pattern of development in this neighborhood The variance request does not meet the review standard 'b' as the site does not have a site- specific constraint. Page l of l Exhibit A 69 Shady Lane • P8 Resolution No._ (SERIES OF 2012) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM THE BUILDING ELEMENTS RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD AT 1260 RED BUTTE DRIVE, SUBDIVIDION; LOT: 2 GAYLORD SUBDIVIDION, CITY ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, COLORADO. Parcel No. 273501316002 WHEREAS,the Community Development Department received an application from John Collett,represented by Stan Mathis, Stan Mathis Architecture,requesting Variance approval from the Entry Door Residential Design Standard at 1260 Red Butte Drive; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.410.020 D. Variances, the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve a Residential Design Standard Variance, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department Staff reviewed the application for compliance with the Residential Design Standard Variance Review Standards; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Director recommended denial of the Variance from Residential Design Standard—Building Elements (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040.(D)(1)(a); and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing;and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 17, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No - , (Series of 2012), by a -- to -- (? —?)vote, approving a Residential Design Standard Variance; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF APSEN PLANNING AND ZONNING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a variance from the following Residential Design Standard: L.U.C. Section 26.410.040.(D)(1)(a), Building Elements — Street oriented entrance and principal window. (Requiring the entry door face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building. A variance is granted to permit the entry door to be more than ten(10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building as outlined in exhibit A of this resolution. P9 The Planning and Zoning Commission has determined the variance request meets the review criteria outlined in L.U.C. Section 26.410.020(D)(1)(a). Section 2: The change order building permit application to develop the above-mentioned residence shall include a copy of the final Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution. All other requirements to develop a single family residence shall be met. Section 3: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded,whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission,are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. APPROVED by the Board of Adjustment at its meeting on July 17, 2012. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONNING COMMISSION: Jim True, special Counsel LJ Ersparmer,Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian,Deputy City Clerk List of Exhibits Exhibit A: South Elevation . P 1 0 Exhibit - A e C ' A3.0 A3.I 411�11i■i■vi■��i■iWelNW e11-1iiiiii■liii■viii■011fli 111-11 f■ii%iITIWN ■ii■%%i■�iiil�] , /■■■■■■■/■■■■1011■■■■■■M111111111111111111111111/11111111111111111111111111111111■1111111111■■■■1111■■1111E1111/I.'^4.r■i= .>i■■■■.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■.■■■.■/■■■■■■■■■■■■■■II,∎Il*� I -- .. :::: 31-t . Wi2 qua ATTACHMENT 2—LAND USE APPLICATION Pv'i';'i` 17 2012 PROJECT: ts` `�` M ',41ti� rty Name: 1 O O is i:tdi f f 1` FVFI ogic Location: i' o f5Orre,! t/ LOTZtGA"r'CoOK.C7 , (Indicate street address,lot&block number,legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID#(REQUIRED) 2..i-3501S V 00 2. APPLICANT: Name: (low Cower Address: O r; U P T V0 50)C 1400 e d ea l�( Phone#: 17.0 -54 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: 917344 MATHIS Address: 4616 etrzexotecteg.4470Sm04$,041 � ► �Ji Phone#: `7 -61.6-66 (e TYPE OF APPLICATION:(please check all that apply): ❑ GMQS Exemption ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Temporary Use GMQS Allotment ❑ Final PUD(&PUD Amendment) ❑ Text/Map Amendment ❑ Special Review ❑ Subdivision ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ ESA—8040 Greenline,Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption(includes ❑ Final SPA(&SPA Margin,Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Amendment) Mountain View Plane ❑ Commercial Design Review ❑ Lot Split ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion vr Residential Design Variance n Lot Line Adjustment n Other: ❑ Conditional Use EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings,uses,previous approvals,etc.) +l tip esuQIZ.Etsrtt-Y UNMV. 0.0057724)(31101-1 PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings,uses,modifications,etc.) VeHAJ ,i((511 iu et Vieo NT taskciz. A 'tfe v.,T 64ai►+c ptvg, Have you attached the following? FEES DUE:$ t djf�s,00 '''-Pre-Application Conference Summary Attachment#1,Signed Fee Agreement 1W`'Response to Attachment#3,Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment#4,Submittal Requirements-Including Written Responses to Review Standards ❑ 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5"X 11"must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format)must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. P12 ( ( )mit \I 1 1. DI \ I 1 01'N11 \ I DI l' %1: 1 III \ t . Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen(City')and Property Phone No.: p -�QQQ Owner CT): �d Q �otr.L �� ,�TT Email: Address of 12610 tom, rri,vE 6iiling rJ9r0P,_ r W� 1�7v F Address: (subject of AS l a.,0 8itolj (send bills here) 'T application) f Coo 12,1612 I understand that the City has adopted,via Ordinance No. . Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and the payment of these fees Is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $ flat fee for . $ flat fee for $ flat fee for . $ flat fee for For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project,it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration,unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read,understood,and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment. t agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ tefia QD deposit for CP hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at$315 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time.Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at$265 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner Chris 8endon Community Development Director 'Mime:1/.244 G O i City Use: Trite: 0 l.43.1Cf�. Fees Due:$ Received:$ Rrir VED MAY 1 7 2012 CITY i� ASPEN Ui4 101. ' i{T JC ELOPi'rti:,ta P13 ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: 1 240 U1 Applicant: eJ {4 w,serrr Location: O KW BUM MUM) WT , q•A'a d)(4 2 ` U 1 2 P V RS f 4 Zone District: F.%) Lot Size: 2 ',1S9 5,f Lot Area: 1,6A[ 4, (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: Proposed: NA-' Number of residential units: Existing: Proposed:• Number of bedrooms: Existing: Proposed: Proposed%of demolition(Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: Allowable: 4616 Proposed: ani Principal bldg.height: Existing: Allowable: e ► Proposed: I96 Access. bldg.height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: iLY A On-Site parking: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Site coverage: Existing: Required: PIA- Proposed: %Open Space: Existing: Required: 0!A- Proposed: Front Setback: Existing: Required: '..3®f Proposed: S54-4 ft i � 6A Rear Setback: Existing: Required% Is= Proposed: lW 354 Combined F/R: Existing: Required: WA Proposed: taitt%Side Setback: Existing: Required: '25' Proposed: 2 ®5 q Il 94T Side Setback: Existing: Required: �5 Proposed: 261-0 u Combined Sides: Existing: Required: (LVA Proposed: Distance Between Existing Required: Proposed: tvA Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: I°4 o N Variations requested: 61 r,644144 Z P14 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Sara Nadolny, 429-2739 DATE: 5/2/2012 PROJECT: 1260 Red Butte Drive ' _' .rt REPRESENTATIVE: Stan Mathis ti OWNER: KAY 17 2012 REQUEST: Residential Design Standard (RDS) Variance, i,; a° h, ASPEN '1':N DESCRIPTION: COO`°f °i t .` YF;_(n 9 The prospective applicant is preparing to submit an application for a residential design variance. The home is built with a current front door on the right side of the property, per Residential Design Standards Section 26.410.040 (D)(1)(a) and (b). The applicant is requesting a variance from this RDS so that the primary front entrance door may be removed and replaced with a front door to the left of the current, in the middle of the existing residence. Staff has determined that this review cannot be handled administratively and requires a Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission review. P&Z is a public hearing and will require noticing. The following two criteria are used in determining the appropriateness of a variance: a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use App: lttelo://www.asggFip(tk €E.cornicdfsdc,ptsr41/a fd U eaPpEO:stt Land Use Code: Ili€.::;1shm(` ftf.aspenpitkin.coni Depc.rh-nf s o` i[[ i us ff' Devel�f��.'��P';;�� t P! [ ni r f / FrO (t firl '6 _.� 2 �...:��.. �t iE � ¢6 i:u Sk �f..�: CJNtE 4YC � f::�t.a 4_„�i£Ihd�F tf.E. ..�l.t'" 1...and-Use-Codef Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.306 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.410.040.D.1.a. & b. (entry door setback& exemption from covered entry porch ) Review by: Community Development for staff recommendation. Planning and Zoning Commission shall be the final review authority. Public Hearing: Required (15 days in advance to public hearing) 1260 Red Butte Drive ACT TT Dnnieanei+ink Tlonm,-, Q+n+ �nr�n �Tnrinrno P15 Planning Fees: $1,890. This includes six (6) hours of staff time. Additional staff hours, if needed, will be billed at $315 per hour. Tfal Deposit: $1,890.00 To apply, submit the following information: 'Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement. l Pre-application Conference Summary. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. ( Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. ( Total deposit for review of the application. VA written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Dr Proposed elevations of the development ffir Copies of the complete application packet and, if applicable, associated drawings. CI' An 8 1/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. P16 May 7,2012 John Collett 1111 Metropolitan Ave,#700 Charlotte,NC 28204-3424 City of Aspen Aspen Community Development Department do Sara Nadolny 130 S. Galena Street Aspen,Colorado 81611 RE: Lot 2,Gaylord Subdivision 1260 Red Butte Drive Parcel ID. #273501316002 Dear Sara, I,John Collett,the Applicant to the Aspen Community Development Department for a Planning and Zoning Commission review of the property referenced above, authorize Stan Mathis to act on my behalf regarding this application. Thank you, hn Collett RECEPTION#: 579842, 05/12/2011 at P 1 7 11:46:42 AM, 1 OF 3, R $21.00 DF $252.20 Doc Code WD Documentary Fee $252.20 Janice K.Vos Caudill, Pitkin County,Co WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made May 12, 2011, Between RIVER AMERICAN PROPERTIES, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY of the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, GRANTOR, AND JOHN COLLETT, GRANTEE whose legal address is : 2635 SHERWOOD AVE., CHARLOTTE. NC 28207-2548 of the County of , State of NORTH CAROLINA 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 the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO,described as follows: LOT 2, GAYLORD SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof recorded July 28, 1976 in Plat Book 5 at Page 20. 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 its self, its 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 and delivery of these presents, it is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure,perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law,in fee simple,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 assigns,against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed. SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2 .v. !.!D its... 1 •.'_N}�i, :='*:r NO_ '_l 3 T E ¢5 2$ ye.,57C 5712 fir P18 SIGNATURE PAGE TO WARRANTY DEED PAGE 2 RIVER AMERICAN PROPERTIES, LLC,A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY - BY: ID. �✓ TITLE: MANA • . lei STATE OF COLORADO ) ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this la day of MAY,2011, by FRANK GOLDSMITH, MANAGER OF RIVER AMERICAN PROPERTIES, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. WITNESS my hand and official seal _ o • goo. my commission expires: 1_t 6.,_[4 /i.tary Public ....., i,„ - vLs c3 Y :co, 4r 9; ' i • PCT23099W4 �' ."s"....? P19 EXHIBIT"A" 1. Taxes for the year 2011 not yet due or payable. 2. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted as reserved in United States Patent recorded in Book 55 at Page 5. 3, Easement granted to Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation District, recorded July 23, 1970 in Book 249 at Page 601,as it affects subject property. 4. Easements, setbacks and restrictions as shown on plat of Gaylord Subdivision, recorded July 28, 1976 in Plat Book 5 at Page 20. 5. Terms, conditions, covenants and obligations as set forth in Subdivision Agreement recorded July 28, 1976 in Book 314 at Page 775. 6. Those terms, conditions, provisions, obligations, easements, restrictions, assessments and all matters as set forth in Protective Covenants for Gaylord Subdivision recorded July 5. 1977 in Book 331 at Page 377 and Resolution of Architectural Committee recorded November 29, 1999 as Reception No. 438066, and Resolution of the Lot Owners recorded April 17, 2008 as Reception No. 548415,deleting therefrom any restrictions indicating any preference. limitation or discrimination based on race, color,religion, sex, handicap,familial status,or national origin. 7. Encroachments of house and wood deck into 25 foot building set back as shown on Improvement Survey prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer, dated 03/01/11 as Job No. 2011-321.001. • 8. Encroachment of landscape berm from adjoining property as shown on Improvement Survey prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer,dated 03/01/11 as Job No.2011-321.001. P20 . May 14, 2012 Stan Mathis 7515 Coal Creek Circle Colorado Springs, Colorado 80911 719.390.6065 719.391.8199 Fax 970.618.6636 Cell pmbacido st '.gmaii.com City of Aspen Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission c/o Sara Nadolny 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Lot 2, Gaylord Subdivision 1260 Red Butte Drive Parcel ID. #273501316002 Dear Commission Members, The Applicant, John Collett, is requesting a Residential Design Standard (RDS) Variance, for Residential Design Standards Section 26.410.040 (D) (1)(a) and (b). The home is under construction at 1260 Red Butte Drive. There are two street facing front doors. The door that enters the mud room is defined by the design standards as the street facing door to the home. The practical entry door to the home is in the center of the courtyard, —34' back from the front-most wall of the building. The maximum distance allowed is 10'. There is a 7'-3" deep covered porch that extends the width of the courtyard at the font door. The roof extends 3'-7"at the door. The area of this porch is-125 s.f. The Applicant is requesting a variance to define the actual entry in the center of the courtyard as the street facing entry door so that currently defined street facing door can be eliminated. The following two criteria are used in determining the appropriateness of a variance: a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or P21 RESPONSE: In this area of the City, unlike the "West End", the lots are not uniform in shape, size and alignment. In this area the lots are large and the majority of the homes along Red Butte Drive do not have street facing doors or meet the definition of a street facing door. b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. RESPONSE: The lot the house is on is wedge shaped and further constrained by a 25' side yard set back required by the Gaylord Subdivision. For this reason we have a wedge shaped floor plan with a welcoming courtyard to greet visitors and by passers. The courtyard offers more open space to the public. Having the street facing door in the courtyard would be a more logical location than where it is required to be under the Residential Design Standards. Thank you for considering this variance request. Please call me if you have any questions. Thank ou, Stan Mathis Representative for John Collett map of aspen colorado-Google Maps Page 1 of 2 ' P 2 2 To see all the details that are visible on the screen, use the"Print"link next to the map. • Google • . N ; '.•.--.„,,,, . • l ,:- , \\ ■ — ,t as so 4 ...), 1 tt I ,, i ,sl- / s ) • i \ . II- 1 la i I 0.41 21. 11260 Red Butte Dr I c , 1 ...ot Rd.2 , Stage Rd ....__-, a .. l oti r..; I ilk 41 fr s, 1 . I 1 r t 3 I IL () \/ ,,, .....,,. ! —Ah Rd 1 4 Dr ei o, 1 I I .3;6. ,l', 'Yu- 4‘r If; 1 I 1 -8 s t.._ ..,,,, ■ I 1 'P Op o -, q t._i topurttairi vte,„Dr __I •.. __ __ 06g ,., 0 . •\ - —,I II"..1 / ; r ARpell i f \ a( n kmeMea'dows i 0 \ C 6 I • <Po \ Red pluitte Cftinpiery Resciil- 0 --— 1 • f.4,.:. 1...J. , , ,.... — / , . i, -s. ..• ,.. . E \ oct ff , cli 0 A 1 I 1 ti .c.:; \ '\.-,.. r9 I /1.'511 s -•ST's„ ,. . . 7 A., ..) ii 0 \ Ife- \ I \ OAP . ,$) \ 1 11! ■ 1, — >0 rs- —.min 37 4 -• rik\ 'I \ c., ca. 4 1 1 1260 Red Butte Drive r, \ \+. -.\\.........., ,-- \ \ ( 3, i if ils. : -"-'1i. *1., 14f Lial I ,a :,,, II„,;;;? ( 5 1 1 I:13'.• ) (1-- cl. 'et i M a p-data©2012 Gfrigig,'''.-! / 5: .;.-- .d.ift.... ...,... , http://maps.google.com/maps?rlz=1T4GGII-LenUS278US278&q=map+of+aspen+colorad... 5/16/2012