Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.201905211 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 21, 2019 4:30 PM, Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I.SITE VISIT II.ROLL CALL III.COMMENTS IV.MINUTES IV.A.Minutes minutes.azp.20190423.pdf V.DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI.NEW BUSINESS VI.A.Resolution XX, 412 N. Eighth Street, Lot 5 of Ranger Station Subdivision Residential Design Standard Variation - Articulation of Building Mass MEMO_Lot 5 P&Z.pdf 412 N. 8th Street_Resolution.docx Exhibit A_Review Criteria.docx Exhibit B_application.pdf Exhibit C_Staff Checklist_sf-dx.pdf VII.OTHER BUSINESS VII.A.Running Commission Meetings Article (Spencer) Running Commission Meetings_article.pdf VIII.BOARD REPORTS IX.ADJOURN Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1)Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda)1 2 2) Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clarifications of applicant 7) Public comments 8)Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal/clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 11) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met or not met. Revised April 2, 2014 2 1 SPECIAL MEETING PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 23, 2019 Chairperson McKnight opened the meeting at 4:31 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Spencer McKnight, Ryan Walterscheid, Rally Dupps, Teraissa McGovern, Ruth Carver, Scott Marcoux, Don Love. Absent were Jimmy Marcus and Brittanie Rockhill. Staff present: Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Phelan said she didn’t put it on the agenda, but if Mr. McKnight wants to talk about the work session follow up tonight, we can do that or move it to a different night. We also had an item for May 7th and that has been withdrawn. We can do a training for new members on that date or we can do a lunch session. MINUTES: Ms. Carver said her comment on recycling pick up should be changed to the middle of April since it’s in the middle of May already and this mistake was on page 12 potentially. MOTION: Mr. Love motioned to approve the minutes of April 16th, Mr. Marcoux seconded. All in favor, motion carried. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: None. PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Bryan said everything is in order. PUBLIC HEARING: 1011 E Hopkins Jennifer Phelan Ms. Phelan noted that Garrett Larimer is sick, so she is filling in for him. She said the goal of this project is to reestablish an accessory dwelling unit at the property known as 1011 E Hopkins via special review. The applicant wants to vary the design parameters. This property is a duplex residence and we’re looking at half of it. It was developed in the 1990’s and received a CO in 1996. The original plan for the accessory dwelling unit was for it to be in the basement, but between getting some approvals and construction, the accessory dwelling unit was relocated to the main floor with a shared entry and was a studio with a kitchenette. At the time, onsite attached accessory units were an acceptable form of mitigation. During inspections, it was noted that the accessory dwelling unit wasn’t present, and the kitchenette had been removed. There were a number of options suggested to the applicant to remedy the situation. You can replace the ADU per today’s codes, apply for special review to replace the ADU with variations to today’s standards or legally remove via cash in lieu or credit. The applicant would like to replace the unit on site in the basement rather than ground floor. Ms. Phelan showed plans on screen and explained where they are proposing to put the unit. Since the 90’s, the design requirements have changed and have become more prescriptive over time regarding size, kitchen design, utility access, etc. detached today instead of being integral to the building. A few years ago, the allowance was removed from the code. It will have a separate exterior access and internal connection to the main house. The minimum size is 369 square feet and the minimum in the code today is 300 square feet. It meets the bathroom requirements, has outdoor access, it meets the snow shedding protection 3 2 SPECIAL MEETING PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 23, 2019 requirements. The items not met in today’s code, which need to be approved via special review are: the size of storage, there is no separate access to utilities, the kitchen is undersized in some components are not there and there are no laundry hookups, the space is entirely below grade and it is not detached. If approved, the conditions would be: 1. Must be building code compliant and apply for permit via the Building Department 2. The deed restriction be insured that it is current with requirements of minimum tenure Ms. Phelan said the board should consider two criteria: 1. if this is designed in an appropriate manner that provides and promotes the ADU program and promotes general livability and 2. is compatible and subordinate to the primary residence. Staff believes the second requirement has been met, but that several aspects fall short of the ADU program. They do think the ADU in the basement provides a more viable option. She noted that ADU’s do not have to be rented, but if they are, they are required to be given to a local working resident. She thinks it’s a better location then where it was, but it doesn’t meet all of today’s standards. If the commission feels that special review is warranted, this will need a building permit to be submitted and issued and will have a better record of what is on that site. If this property changed hands in the future, it will be a good record of what is there and what is expected in the future. Mr. McKnight asked if the city is no longer offering mitigation credits for ADU’s. Ms. Phelan said the program has changed in the past two years and it really came down to two options that people took advantage of the most. Either provide an onsite accessory dwelling unit or pay a cash in lieu. Council felt these units weren’t being occupied to the extent they would like, so that was removed as a form of mitigation from the land use code. Affordable housing credits are what need to be extinguished for mitigation today. Mr. McKnight asked if someone removed without proper authorization, would there be a paper trail which the new owner would see, and Ms. Phelan said there is a deed restriction on those units, so a new owner would see that. Ms. Carver said she read in the notes something about receiving a floor area bonus if the ADU was relocated to the ground level and she asked if this project had received the floor area bonus. Ms. Phelan said it’s not clear, but her conclusion is that they did receive a bonus. It wasn’t outlined clearly that they did receive a bonus, however. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Chris Bendon of Bendon Adams Mr. Bendon said this project was continued from last time because neither the applicant or their attorney could be here, but none are here now either. The applicant has local ties and bought property three years ago. The property is located on the east side of town right before you cross the bridge. Chris explained the house on screen with pictures. The requirements for an ADU in the 90’s were less than they are today and this was generation one of the ADU code. ADU’s were encouraged to be attached at that time and accessed from the alley and subtle in character and subordinate to the primary residence. Subgrade units were allowed, and internal connections were allowed. There were no specific kitchen standards and no specific storage requirements. The record is pretty sparse as far as what took place in the past and it’s a little helter skelter at the moment. Mr. Bendon showed his current plan and promised to have a four-burner stove and a little larger kitchen. This is a small scale ADU which fits inside the house and allows for independent living and fits with the RMF zone district purpose. It’s a typical ADU from the 90’s and is a small unit with access off the alley. In 2005, the kitchen definition changed and required more. We do have a four-burner stove and apartment size fridge with 4 3 SPECIAL MEETING PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 23, 2019 a freezer and have committed to those. We did consider installing a washer dryer hookup in the closet, but the tenant would have access to the laundry and mechanical area. We can’t have the unit detached without blowing up the entire property and it is better to have it here than where it was originally planned. Eric Marshall, the owner, got pulled into this not understanding what an ADU is and much less if they had one or were supposed to have one. This came up during a CO review and that is how this all started. Ms. McGovern asked if the floor area on site is greater than what is allowed, and Mr. Bendon said there isn’t a current take off under today’s code. Mr. Bendon said it was his expectation that it was built out to the 1990 maximum. Ms. McGovern asked if he has done a floor area calculation and Mr. Bendon said he has not and the only thing which indicates that they didn’t get the bonus is that the floor area didn’t change after taking the unit up from the basement to the main level. It was basically swapping one bedroom for another. The record seems to indicate that the project was deep into construction and they chose to put it somewhere else. Ms. McGovern asked if the laundry and mechanical access is through the main house, if that language be put in the deed restriction for it to remain this way. Mr. Bendon said yes, and it will be lockable from the ADU side. Ms. Phelan said we would put this language in the resolution. Mr. Dupps asked if there were storage requirements in the 90’s and Mr. Bendon said no, he researched it. He said we are not far from the requirements of the 2005 code. Ms. Carver asked if the ADU tenant would have access to the whole house and Mr. Bendon said yes, it’s important they have access to the laundry room and the mechanical room. There would have to be a level of trust between the ADU tenant and the home owner. We did look at other scenarios, but nothing seemed viable. Mr. Dupps asked if they are trying to go back to the 90’s code or if they are picking and choosing which code to go by. Ms. Phelan said that technically, if it was not removed appropriately, we would have to replace to today’s standards, but it’s not the most practical solution here. It’s hybrid at this point. Mr. Bendon agreed and said the board has two criteria that needs to be addressed and that is whether the restoration is discreet and promotes the ADU program. It is a little vague, but within the board’s latitude. Ms. McGovern asked if there is a parking spot on site and Mr. Bendon said yes. Mr. Marcoux asked if there would be wall cabinets above the counter and Mr. Bendon said we can do that especially if that moves a needle, we can take a look. Mr. Marcoux said it might help with saving space and adding additional storage for the kitchen. Mr. Love asked if the design of this is too integral to actually have someone living there and serve the purpose of a living space and Mr. Bendon said that it was typical of the era to have access to the house and you’re not required to rent out the ADU. Mr. Love said it’s pretty compromised in a house this nice. Mr. Bendon said yes and no; there are a ¼ or so occupied, which has been determined by the city. Ms. Carver asked where the parking space is, and Mr. Bendon said it’s a two-car garage. Ms. Phelan said you can do tandem parking for these units. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 5 4 SPECIAL MEETING PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 23, 2019 Mr. Dupps doesn’t see any problem with this ADU and said it’s in the same neighborhood as the other duplex’s that had to mitigate for this in the 1990’s. This is a workable solution and sees no problem with this. Ms. McGovern said she is playing devil’s advocate regarding if something was approved, built and then removed, should the current applicant get the bonus of putting it back in or should they pay mitigation because they didn’t do their due diligence. She suggested paying into something that would benefit housing employees instead of reestablishing something that most likely won’t be housing anyone. Mr. Dupps said he hears her concern, but he is currently working on a similar project like this and said it goes back to when it was first approved. From an HPC aspect, he feels this is in the same spirit of when it was first approved. To Ms. McGovern, this is a prime example of why this doesn’t work because there is no way for an employee to be housed. She doesn’t see how this helps with the employee housing crunch. Mr. Walterscheid said he agrees with Mr. Dupps. We’re not giving a bonus now and it’s non-conforming now as it was then, so he has no problem with this. Mr. Marcoux said he would like to see a microwave and for them to make the kitchen more functional. Mr. Love said he agrees with Ms. McGovern and Mr. Dupps. He’s bugged by the fact that it starts as an ADU and ends up not being that. But I guess in light of the historic nature, he is probably ok with it. Ms. McGovern asked how it is considered historic when it was built in the ‘90’s. Ms. Carver said she was definitely against it and then she walked by the property and said we have a lot of people living in these circumstances. It will probably never benefit employee housing in our community, so if approved, it would have to have access to the laundry and mechanical. She said she will be a hardliner and say no because it was taken out and they were allowed extra square footage initially. It’s only fair that they should mitigate it. Mr. McKnight said there are definitely two arguments and he sees both sides. If you are the new home owner, you have to maintain this ADU by current codes but with the crises that we are in, we should let them do this. We can’t force them to use this unit. He knows plenty of people that would die to have this unit as is, so he feels the option should be out there and he’s leaning towards yes. Ms. McGovern thinks they are supporting bad behavior. Mr. Walterscheid said we are supporting the code from the ‘90’s. The fact that they are relocating it to a spot where it could be used by a third party, whether they are a care taker or a stranger, he would still rather have it being used in this situation. They’re not proposing to expand, and they are not changing the footprint, just relocating. Ms. McGovern said she’d rather see it just be cash in lieu or housing credit to be extinguished and move on. She feels the unit would be very difficult to rent out. Ms. Carver said this board is setting a precedent. Mr. McKnight asked if the owners would be open to more construction to make it more blocked off and Mr. Bendon said they just remodeled the home and love it the way it is. They are not interested in doing more frankly and don’t want to chop up the space. Your task is to apply the criteria. Ms. Bryan reminded the board of the staff memo with the criteria that needs to be applied and what needs to be followed in making their decision. 6 5 SPECIAL MEETING PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 23, 2019 MOTION: Mr. Dupps motioned to approve resolution #06, Mr. Walterscheid seconded with amendment under section 1, point 2 and 7 with access to the shared mechanical room and laundry, shall be maintained. Access shall be maintained. Roll call vote: Mr. Dupps, yes; Ms. McGovern, no; Mr. McKnight, yes; Mr. Walterscheid, yes; Mr. Marcoux, yes; Ms. Carver, no; Mr. Love, yes. 5-2, motion carried. Ms. Phelan asked the board if they would like to have the discussion regarding their check ins with council and they agreed. MOTION: Teraissa motioned to adjourn, rally seconded. All in favor, motion carried at 5:58 pm. 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Ben Anderson, Planner II THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director RE: 412 N. Eighth Street; Residential Design Standard Variation, Articulation of Building Mass MEETING DATE: May 21, 2019 Applicant: Forest Lookout I, LLC 605 W. Main Street, Aspen CO, 81611 Representative: Joseph Spears and Kevin Wolf S2 Architects Location: 412 N. 8th Street, Lot 5 of the Ranger Station Subdivision Current Zoning: Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Summary: The applicant is requesting a variation to the Residential Design Standards for the construction of a single-family residence. Specifically, the request is for a variation to the Articulation of Building Mass standard. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the request for a variation from the Articulation of Building Mass Residential Design standard. Figure 1: Vicinity Map, 412 N. 8th is identified in green. Figure 2. Rendering, proposed design 8 Page 2 of 6 412 N. 8th Street, RDS Variation REQUEST OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: The Applicant is requesting the following approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission: • Residential Design Standards (RDS) Variation (Section 26.410.020.C, Variations): To grant a variation of the Articulation of Building Mass standard - a non-flexible design standard, to construct a single-family residence. Applications that do not comply with the standards contained in the Residential Design section of the code, in which an applicant is applying for a variation, require approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final decision-making body. BACKGROUND: 412 N. Eighth St. is located on Lot 5 of the Ranger Station Subdivision in the Medium Density Residential, (R-6) zone district. Planning and Zoning Commission has recently considered RDS variation requests for the adjacent Lot 4 of the subdivision and Lot 3 which faces Eighth Street. The currently vacant Lot 5 is a 7,465 square foot lot within the Aspen Infill Area. A vacated right-of-way (Francis Street) on the property reduces the net lot area to 4,996 square feet. The design for a single-family home proposes a Floor Area of 3,208 square feet which includes the landing of a TDR. PROPOSAL: The proposed design for the single-family residence does not meet the Articulation of Building Mass Standard (26.410.030.B.1), a non-flexible standard. This standard provides three options for meeting the standard – all three of which are established to reduce perceived massing and encourage articulation of the primary and secondary forms of the home. The option that the proposed design is most closely meeting is as follows: 2. Off-set with one story ground level connector: A principal building shall provide a portion of its mass as a subordinate one-story, ground floor connecting element. The connecting element shall be at least ten (10) feet in length and shall be setback at least an additional five (5) feet from the sidewall on both sides of the building. The connecting element shall occur at a maximum of forty-five (45) feet in depth, as measured from the front-most wall of the front façade to the rear wall. Accessible outdoor space over the connecting element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an accessible outdoor space over a connecting element must be the minimum reasonably necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must be 50% or more transparent. Figure 3. Drawings in the Land Use Code to illustrate Option 2 in meeting Articulation of Building Mass. 9 Page 3 of 6 412 N. 8th Street, RDS Variation The proposed design approaches the requirements of Option 2 but does not meet them. The design has two, two-story masses that are connected by a one-story connecting element. On the north façade, the design has the required five feet setback for the connecting element from the two-story masses. On the south façade, a one-story element begins at the front façade and continues to the rear – running past the connecting element and preventing the same required setback on the south façade. Figure 4. Rendering, Front (west) and Side (south) Figure 5. Front (west) Elevation – in green is the one- story element that extends beyond the connecting element. Figure 6. South Elevation – in green is the one-story element that extends beyond the connecting element. In blue are the primary and secondary masses of the home 10 Page 4 of 6 412 N. 8th Street, RDS Variation Figure 7. Plan View. In blue are the primary and secondary masses of the home separated by the connecting element (in red). In green is the one-story element that extends beyond the connecting element preventing the required setback. As the design does not meet the standard, the applicant is requesting a review for an RDS variation. The Review Criteria for granting a variation are as follows: 1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as indicated in the intent statement for that standard as well as the general intent statements in Section 26.410.010.A1-3; or 2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. In staff’s view, there are no unusual site-specific constraints. As such, P&Z’s review is then directed by the the overall intent of the standard and the general intent statements for RDS. The intent statement for the Articulation of Building Mass standard is as follows: “Intent. This standard seeks to reduce the overall perceived mass and bulk of buildings on a property as viewed from all sides. Designs should promote light and air access between adjacent properties. Designs should articulate building walls by utilizing multiple forms to break up large expansive wall planes. Buildings should include massing and articulation that convey forms that are similar in massing to historic Aspen residential buildings. This standard is critical in the Infill Area where small lots, small side and front setbacks, alleys and historic Aspen building forms are prevalent. Designs should change the plane of a building’s sidewall, step a primary building’s height down to one-story in the rear portion or limit the overall depth of the structure.” The general intent statement is as follows: 26.410.010. General A. Intent. The City’s Residential Design Standards are intended to ensure a strong connection between residences and streets; ensure buildings provide articulation to break up bulk and mass; and preserve historic neighborhood scale and character. The standards do not prescribe architectural style, but do require that 11 Page 5 of 6 412 N. 8th Street, RDS Variation each home, while serving the needs of its owner, contribute positively to the streetscape. The Residential Design Standards are intended to achieve the following objectives: 1. Connect to the Street. Establish a visual and/or physical connection between residences and streets and other public areas. The area between the street and the front of a residential building is a transition between the public realm of the neighborhood and the private realm of a dwelling. This transition can strongly impact the human experience of the street. Improve the street experience for pedestrians and vehicles by establishing physical and visual relationships between streets, and residential buildings located along streets. Porches, walkways from front entries to the street, and prominent windows that face the street are examples of elements that connect to the street. 2. Respond to Neighboring Properties. Reduce perceived mass and bulk of residential buildings from all sides. Encourage a relationship to adjacent development through similar massing and scale. Create a sense of continuity through building form and setback along the streetscape. Providing offsets or changes of plane in the building facades or reducing the height near side lot lines are examples of responding to neighboring properties. 3. Reflect Traditional Building Scale. Retain scale and proportions in building design that are in keeping with Aspen’s historic architectural tradition, while also encouraging design flexibility. Reinforce the unique character of Aspen by drawing upon the City’s vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in the design of structures. Encourage creative and contemporary architecture, but at a scale that respects historic design traditions. Ensure that residential structures respond to “human-scale” in their design. Ensure that residential structures do not visually overwhelm or overshadow streets. Windows that are similar in size to those seen in historic Aspen architecture or limiting the height of a porch to be in line with the first story of a building are examples of reflecting traditional building scale. STAFF EVALUATION: On new construction, on a site that has no unusual constraints, staff does not typically support requests for variations to the Articulation of Building Mass standard. This is probably the most important of the RDS standards and most requests are attempting to increase the massing of the building. In this design proposal, the massing of the building’s elements meet the dimensional requirements of Option 2, with the exception of the 5 feet setback for the connecting element on the south façade. It is the addition of the one-story element along the south façade that prevents this requirement from being met. In staff’s view, this one-story element (depicted in green in the drawings above) further articulates the south façade by breaking up and providing variation from the prominent two-story masses. From the standard intent statement, two phrases are most important to this finding: 1) “Designs should articulate building walls by utilizing multiple forms to break up large expansive wall planes…”; and, 2) Designs should change the plane of a building’s sidewall…” Again, while staff is typically opposed to variation requests to this standard, in this case, staff’s view is that the intent statement is advanced by the proposed design. Staff additionally finds that the general intent statement is met by this proposed design. 12 Page 6 of 6 412 N. 8th Street, RDS Variation P&Z approval of this variation would also provide general RDS approval. Staff has evaluated the project for all other RDS standards and has found that the design meets the standards (See Exhibit C for a full RDS checklist). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the RDS variation request. Approval of this review grants the variation to the specific standard and general RDS approval. PROPOSED MOTION: The resolution is written in the affirmative, approving the request. If the commission supports staff’s recommendation, a motion to approve is provided below: “I move to approve Resolution XX, Series of 2019, granting a Variation from the Articulation of Building Mass standard and Residential Design Standards’ approval for 412 N. Eighth Street.” Attachments: Exhibit A - Residential Design Standards Review Criteria Exhibit B - Application Exhibit C - RDS Checklist 13 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO.___ (SERIES OF 2019) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIATION FOR A PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 5 RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT, RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018, IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT PAGE 22 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 412 N EIGHTH STREET. Parcel No. 2735-124-28-004 WHEREAS,the Community Development Department received an application from Forest Lookout I, LLC; 605 W. Main Street, Aspen, CO 81611; represented by S2 Architects, requesting approval for a Residential Design Standard Variation for the property at 412 N. Eighth Street; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department Staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards; and, WHEREAS,upon review of the application and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of Residential Design Standard Variation; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on May 21, 2019; and, WHEREAS,the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets the applicable review criteria and that the approval of the request is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS,the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and, WHEREAS,the Planning and Zoning Commission approvesResolution _, Series of 2019, by a ___ to ____ (_ - _) vote, granting approval of the Residential Design Standard Variation as identified herein. 14 Page 2 of 2 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission: Section 1: Residential Design Standard Variation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the request for a Residential Design Standard variation to construct a single-family residence on the subject site (Chapter 26.410.020.C, Variations), varying from the Articulation of Building Mass standard (26.410.030.B.1). This resolution further grants general RDS approval. This approval does not provide exemption to any other requirements of the Aspen Land Use Code – including height or setback limitations. Section 2: 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 site development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. 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 andindependent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Commission at its meeting on May 21, 2019. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: __________________________________________________________ Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Spencer McKnight, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________ Jeanine Stickle, Records Manager Exhibits: Exhibit A: Approved Plans 15 Exhibit A Review Criteria – RDS Variation A. Variation Review Standards.An application requesting a variation from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall find that the variation, if granted would: 1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statements in Section 26.410.010.A.1-3; or Staff Finding – Staff has evaluated and discussed the proposed design and finds that it meets the intent statement for the Articulation of Building Mass Standard. The two phrases from the intent statement that are most applicable are: 1) “Designs should articulate building walls by utilizing multiple forms to break up large expansive wall planes…”; and, 2) Designs should change the plane of a building’s sidewall…” The intent for the specific Articulation standard and the general intent statements for RDS are included below for further consideration. 2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding – This is not applicable as there are not unusual site-specific constraints. 26.410.010.General A. Intent. The City’s Residential Design Standards are intended to ensure a strong connection between residences and streets; ensure buildings provide articulation to break up bulk and mass; and preserve historic neighborhood scale and character. The standards do not prescribe architectural style, but do require that each home, while serving the needs of its owner, contribute positively to the streetscape. The Residential Design Standards are intended to achieve the following objectives: 1. Connect to the Street. Establish a visual and/or physical connection between residences and streets and other public areas. The area between the street and the front of a residential building is a transition between the public realm of the neighborhood and the private realm of a dwelling. This transition can strongly impact the human experience of the street. Improve the street experience for pedestrians and vehicles by establishing physical and visual relationships between streets, and residential buildings located along streets. Porches, walkways from front entries to the street, and prominent windows that face the street are examples of elements that connect to the street. 2. Respond to Neighboring Properties. Reduce perceived mass and bulk of residential buildings from all sides. Encourage a relationship to adjacent development through similar massing and scale. Create a sense of continuity through building form and setback along 16 the streetscape. Providing offsets or changes of plane in the building facades or reducing the height near side lot lines are examples of responding to neighboring properties. 3. Reflect Traditional Building Scale. Retain scale and proportions in building design that are in keeping with Aspen’s historic architectural tradition, while also encouraging design flexibility. Reinforce the unique character of Aspen by drawing upon the City’s vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in the design of structures. Encourage creative and contemporary architecture, but at a scale that respects historic design traditions. Ensure that residential structures respond to “human-scale” in their design. Ensure that residential structures do not visually overwhelm or overshadow streets. Windows that are similar in size to those seen in historic Aspen architecture or limiting the height of a porch to be in line with the first story of a building are examples of reflecting traditional building scale. 26.410.030.Single-family & duplex standards A. Applicability.Unless stated otherwise below, the design standards in this section shall apply to all single-family and duplex development. B. Location and Massing. 1. Articulation of Building Mass (Non-flexible). b) Intent. This standard seeks to reduce the overall perceived mass and bulk of buildings on a property as viewed from all sides. Designs should promote light and air access between adjacent properties. Designs should articulate building walls by utilizing multiple forms to break up large expansive wall planes. Buildings should include massing and articulation that convey forms that are similar in massing to historic Aspen residential buildings. This standard is critical in the Infill Area where small lots, small side and front setbacks, alleys and historic Aspen building forms are prevalent. Designs should change the plane of a building’s sidewall, step a primary building’s height down to one-story in the rear portion or limit the overall depth of the structure. 17 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GENERAL LAND USE PACKET Attached is an Application for review of Development that requires Land Use Review pursuant to The City of Aspen Land Use Code: Included in this package are the following attachments: 1.Development Application Fee Policy, Fee Schedule and Agreement to Pay Application Fees Form 2.Land Use Application Form 3.Dimensional Requirements Form (if required) 4.HOA Compliance Form 5.Development Review Procedure All Application are reviewed based on the criteria established in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code is available at the City Clerk’s Office on the second floor of City Hall and on the internet at www.cityofaspen.com, City Departments, City Clerk, Municipal Code, and search Title 26. We require all applicants to hold a Pre-Application Conference with a Planner in the Community Development Department so that the requirements for submitting a complete application can be fully described. This meeting can happen in person or by phone or e-mail. Also, depending upon the complexity of the development proposed, submitting one copy of the development application to the Case Planner to determine accuracy, inefficiencies, or redundancies can reduce the overall cost of materials and Staff time. Please recognize that review of these materials does not substitute for a complete review of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. While this application package attempts to summarize the key provisions of the Code as they apply to your type of development, it cannot possibly replicate the detail or the scope of the Code. If you have questions which are not answered by the materials in this package, we suggest that you contact the staff member assigned to your case, contact Planner of the Day, or consult the applicable sections of the Aspen Land Use Code. 18 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 Land Use Review Fee Policy The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City Departments reviewing the application (referral departments) will also be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative – meaning an application with multiple flat fees must be pay the sum of those flat fee. Flat fees are not refundable. A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff time is required. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Deposit amount may be reduces if, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates. A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-application conference by the case planner. Hourly billing shall still apply. All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required fee. The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the processing of a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the applicant’s request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the applicant with no additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval. Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final and recordation of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purpose of billing. Upon conceptual approval all billing shall be reconciled and past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final submission. Upon final approval all billing shall be again reconciled prior to the Director accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation. The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30 or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 days or more past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.7% per month. An unpaid invoice o f 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information is public domain. All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already accepted, and unpaid invoice of 90 days or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance of a stop work order until full payment is made. The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties. 19 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2017, review fees for Land Use applications and 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 addit ional 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 no-payment. I 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 and 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. $________________ deposit for_____________ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $________________ deposit for _____________ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: ________________________________ Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director Signature: _________________________________________ PRINT Name: _______________________________________ Title: ______________________________________________City Use: Fees Due: $_______Received $_______ Case #___________________________ Please type or print in all caps Address of Property: ______________________________________________ Property Owner Name: __________________________ Representative Name (if different from Property Owner)_______________________ Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Contact info for billing: e-mail: _______________________________________ Phone: __________________________ Michael H Brown Manager 20 November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name and Address:_________________________________________________________________________ Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) _____________________________ APPLICANT: Name: ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone #: ___________________________ email: __________________________________ REPRESENTIVATIVE: Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone#: _____________________________ email:___________________________________ Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Review: Administrative or Board Review Have you included the following?FEES DUE: $ ______________ Pre-Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary Required Land Use Review(s): Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: Net Leasable square footage _________ Lodge Pillows______ Free Market dwelling units ______ Affordable Housing dwelling units_____ Essential Public Facility square footage ________ 21 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project and Location ____________________________________________________________________ Applicant: ____________________________________________________________________________ Gross Lot Area: __________Zone Zone District: _______ Net Lot Area: __________ Please fill out all relevant dimensions Single Family and Duplex Residential Existing Allowed Proposed 1) Floor Area (square feet) 2) Maximum Height 3) Front Setback 4) Rear Setback 5) Side Setbacks 6) Combined Side Setbacks 7) % Site Coverage 8) Minimum distance between buildings Proposed % of demolition ______ Commercial Proposed Use(s)____________________ Existing Allowed Proposed 1) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 2) Floor Area (square feet) 3) Maximum Height 4) Off-Street Parking Spaces 5) Second Tier (square feet) 6) Pedestrian Amenity (square feet) Proposed % of demolition ______ Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: **Please refer to section 26.575.020 for information on how to calculate Net Lot Area Multi-family Residential Existing Allowed Proposed 1) Number of Units 2) Parcel Density (see 26.710.090.C.10) 3) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 4) Floor Area (square feet) 4) Maximum Height 5) Front Setback 6) Rear Setback 7) Side Setbacks Proposed % of demolition ______ Lodge Additional Use(s)____________________ Existing Allowed Proposed 1) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 2)Floor Area (square feet) 3)Maximum Height 4) Free Market Residential(square feet) 4) Front setback 5) Rear setback 6) Side setbacks 7) Off-Street Parking Spaces 8) Pedestrian Amenity (square feet) Proposed % of demolition ______ Complete only if required by the PreApplication checklist 22 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT November 2017 City of Aspen | 130 S. Galena St. | (970) 920-5090 Homeowner Association Compliance Policy All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association Compliance Form (this form) certifying the scope of work included in the land use application complies with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by the property owner or Attorney representing the property owner. Property Owner (“I”): Name: Email: Phone No.: Address of Property: (subject of application) I certify as follows: (pick one) □This property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant. □This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. □This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I understand that this document is a public document. Owner signature: _________________________ date:___________ Owner printed name: _________________________ or, Attorney signature: _________________________ date:___________ Attorney printed name: _________________________ 1/7/2019 | 9:21 AM PST Michael H Brown 23 November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE 1.Attend pre-application conference. During this one-on-one meeting, staff will determine the review process which applies to your development proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application. 2.Submit Development Application. Based on your pre-application meeting, you should respond to the application package and submit the requested number of copies of the complete application and the application and the appropriate processing fee to the Community Development Department. 3.Determination of Completeness. Within five working days of the date of your submission, staff will review the application, and will notify you in writing whether the application is complete or if additional materials are required. Please be aware that the purpose of the completeness review is to determine whether or not the information you have submitted is adequate to review the request, and not whether the information is sufficient to obtain approval. 4.Staff Review of Development Application. Once your application is determined to be complete, it will be reviews by the staff for compliance with the applicable standards of the Code. During the staff review stage, the application will be referred to other agencies for comments. The Planner assigned to your case or the agency may contact you if additional information is needed or if problems are identified. A memo will be written by the staff member for signature by the Community Development Director. The memo will explain whether your application complies with the Code and will list any conditions which should apply if the application is to be approved. Final approval of any Development Application which amends a recorded document, such as a plat, agreement or deed restriction, will require the applicant to prepare an amended version of that document for review and approval by staff. Staff will provide the applicant with the applicable contents for the revised plat, while the City Attorney is normally in charge of the form for recorded agreements and deed restrictions. We suggest that you not go to the trouble or expense of preparing these documents until the staff has determined that your application is eligible for the requested amendment or exemption. 5.Board Review of Application. If a public hearing is required for the land use action that you are requesting, then the Planning Staff will schedule a hearing date for the application upon determination that the Application is complete. The hearing(s) will be scheduled before the appropriate reviewing board(s). The applicant will be required to nail notice (one copy provided by the Community Development Department) to property owners within 30 feet of the subject property and post notice (sign available at the Community Development Department) of the public hearing on the site at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date (please see Attachment 6 for instructions). The Planning Staff will publish notice of the hearing in the paper for land use requests that require publication. The Planning Staff will then formulate a recommendation on the land use request and draft a memo to the reviewing board(s). Staff will supply the Applicant with a copy of the Planning Staff’s memo approximately 5 days prior to the hearing. The public hearing(s) will take place before the appropriate review boards. Public Hearings include a presentation by the Planning Staff, a presentation by the Applicant (optional), consideration of public comment, and the reviewing board’s questions and decision. (Continued on next page) 24 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 6.Issuance of Development Order. If the land use review is approved, then the Planning Staff will issue a Development Order which allows the Applicant to proceed into Building Permit Application. 7.Receipt of Building Permit. Once you have received a copy of the signed staff approval, you may proceed to building permit review. During this time, your project will be examined for its compliance with the Uniform Building Code. It will also be checked for compliance with applicable provisions of the Land Use Regulations which were not reviewed in detail during the one step review (this might include a check of floor area ratios, setbacks, parking, open space and the like). Fees for water, sewer, parks and employee housing will be collected if due. Any document required to be recorded, such as a plat, deed restriction or agreement, will be reviewed and recorded before a Building Permit is submitted. 25 J. Bart Johnson 970.544.4602 johnson@wcrlegal.com March 27, 2019 City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Lot 5, Ranger Station Subdivision, RDS Variation Application To Whom it May Concern: My name is Bart Johnson and I am an attorney based in Aspen, Colorado and am licensed to practice law in Colorado. I represent Forest Lookout I LLC with respect to the property located at 426 North 8th Street, Aspen, which property has County Assessor Parcel ID #27351248005 and is legally described as: Lot 5, as described on the Amended and Restated Plat of Ranger Station Subdivision recorded May 25, 2018 in Plat Book 122 at Page 022 as Reception No. 647625. I am writing this letter to verify that such property is owned by Forest Lookout I LLC, with the mailing address: 605 West Main Street #2, Aspen, CO 81611, subject to matters of record. Sincerely, Bart Johnson for WAAS CAMPBELL RIVERA JOHNSON & VELASQUEZ LLP Enclosure cc: Michael Brown Joseph Spears, S2 Architects 26 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATE: March 22, 2019 PLANNER: Ben Anderson, 429-2765 PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 412 N. 8th St.; Lot 5, Ranger Station Subdivision - RDS Variation REPRESENTATIVE: Kevin Wolf, S2 Architects DESCRIPTION: 412 N. 8th Street, also know as Lot 5 of the Ranger Station Subdivision is located in the R-6 Zone District, and within the Aspen Infill Area. A new, single family home is proposed for the lot, which is currently undeveloped. An RDS application was submitted for staff review. During the review, staff determined that the proposed design did not meet the Articulation of Building Mass standard, a non-flexible standard. A variation to a non-flexible standard requires review and approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Articulation of Building Mass standard provides three options in meeting the standard. The proposed design is most closely pursuing Option 2, Off-set with one-story Ground Level Connector. The north side of the proposed design meets the requirements of the standard. The south side does not. Planning and Zoning Commission will be evaluating whether the design choice on the south side meets the intent of the standard. A variation requires review by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. An application requesting a variation from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall find the variation, if granted would: 1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standards as indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statements in Section 26.410.010.A.1-3; or 2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. An approval by P&Z will grant a variation to the standard and provide RDS approval. A denial will require a redesign to meet the requirements of the standard. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.410.020.C Residential Design Standard Variations 26.410.030.B.1 Articulation of Building Mass For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below: Land Use Application Land Use Code REVIEW BY: Community Development Staff for complete application PUBLIC HEARING: Yes, Planning & Zoning Commission PLANNING FEES: $3,250 Deposit for 10 hours of staff time (additional or less hours will be billed or refunded at a rate of $325 per hour) REFERRAL FEES: None TOTAL DEPOSIT: $3,250 27 APPLICATION CHECKLIST – These items should first be submitted in a paper copy.  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to action on behalf of the applicant.  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, 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.  An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.  HOA Compliance form (Attached).  A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of Colorado.  A 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 and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.  Completed copy of the Residential Design Standard Checklist: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/View/1697  Written responses to all applicable review criteria. Important to this application is a response that explains how the proposed design meets the standard’s intent statement. If the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:  Total deposit for review of the application.  A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format. Depending on further review of the case, additional items may be requested of the application. Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the applicant/applicant’s representative will receive an e-mail requesting submission of an electronic copy of the complete application and the deposit. Once the deposit is received, the case will be assigned to a planner and the land use review will begin. 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. 28 Residential Design Standards Administrative Review Section 26.410.020.B. of the Land Use Code requires an Administrative Review for compliance with the Residential Design Standards (RDS) for all residential projects, unless otherwise exempted pursuant to Section 26.410.010.C. Exempt projects include: • An addition or remodel to an existing structure that does not change the exterior of the building • A remodel of a structure where the alterations proposed change the exterior of the building, but are not addressed by any of the RDS • A residential unit within a mixed-use building • A designated historic resource listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. New buildings on a historic landmark lot are not exempt. All applicable residential projects shall submit for RDS Administrative Review or Alternative Compliance prior to building permit submittal. An applicant may choose to apply directly for a variation from the Planning & Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.410.020.C. A pre-application summary will be required for a variation request. Review Process: The Community Development Department staff shall review an application for applicability and compliance with Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards. If the application complies with all applicable standards as written, a signed Checklist and stamped plan set shall be provided to the applicant to be included with building permit submission. If the application does not comply with one or more applicable standards, an unsigned Checklist and redlined plan set shall be emailed to the applicant including comments from staff on which standard(s) the application does not comply with and a description of why the standard(s) is not compliant. The applicant shall be provided the opportunity to revise and resubmit the design in response to the comments. Staff will keep an application open for 30 days from the date an unsigned Checklist is emailed to the applicant. If after such time no revisions are submitted, the application will be removed from the review system. Pursuant to 26.410.020.C, projects that do not meet the criteria for Administrative Review or Alternative Compliance (as determined by staff) may be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission, or HPC if appropriate, at the applicant’s request. A pre-application summary will be required for a variation request. Page 1 of 2 29 Application for RDS Administrative Review: An application for RDS Administrative Review that IS NOT requesting Alternative Compliance shall be submitted to the Community Development front desk on a USB drive or CD or emailed to justin.barker@cityofaspen.com. Applicants shall be notified of complete/incomplete application by email. An application for RDS Administrative Review shall include the following documents in digital format: • Proof of ownership (no older than 6 months from submittal date) • Representative authorization letter from owner • Vicinity map • Site improvement survey certified by a registered land surveyor (no older than one year from submittal date) • Site plan (scaled 24”x36”) • Floor plans (scaled 24”x36”) • Elevations (scaled 24”x36”) • Complete scope of work noting all areas affected by the proposed project • Complete RDS applicant checklist (attached) addressing how each standard is met with sheet references for each standard Application for RDS Alternative Compliance: An application for RDS Alternative Compliance will require a pre-application summary provided by Community Development staff, and shall be submitted as a Land Use Application. Required application submittal items shall be outlined in the pre-application summary. Page 2 of 2 Residential Design Standards Administrative Review 30 Residential Design Standards Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist Standard Complies Alternative Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes B.1.Articulation of Building Mass (Non-flexible) B.2.Building Orientation (Flexible) B.3.Build-to Requirement (Flexible) B.4.One Story Element (Flexible) C.1.Garage Access (Non-flexible) C.2.Garage Placement (Non-flexible) C.3.Garage Dimensions (Flexible) Instructions: Please fill out the checklist below, marking whether the proposed design complies with the applicable standard as written or is requesting Alternative Compliance (only permitted for Flexible standards). Also include the sheet #(s) demonstrating the applicable standard. If a standard does not apply, please mark N/A and include in the Notes section why it does not apply. If Alternative Compliance is requested for a Flexible standard, include in the Notes section how the proposed design meets the intent of the standard(s). Additional sheets/graphics may be attached. Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review. Address: Parcel ID: Zone District/PD: Representative: Email: Phone: Page 1 of 2 31 Standard Complies Alternative Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes C.4.Garage Door Design (Flexible) D.1.Entry Connection (Non-flexible) D.2.Door Height (Flexible) D.3.Entry Porch (Flexible) E.1.Principle Window (Flexible) E.2.Window Placement (Flexible) E.3.Nonorthogonal Window Limit (Flexible) E.4.Lightwell/Stairwell Location (Flexible) E.5.Materials (Flexible) Residential Design Standards Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review. Page 2 of 2 32 215 S. MONARCH STE G-102 ASPEN, CO 81611 P 970.544.4856 WWW.S2ARCHITECTS.COM 3/4/2019 12:20:18 PM03.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION FOREST LOOKOUT - LOT 5 33 BUILDING OWNER CONTRACTOR FOREST LOOKOUT II, LLC RA NELSON, LLC 605 W. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2 51 EAGLE ROAD #2 ASPEN, CO 81611 AVON, CO 81620 CONTACT: HARRIS BERLINKSY 970-748-7696 HARRIS@HAYMAX.COM CONTACT: TIM CARPENTER TCARPENTER@RANELSON.COM ARCHITECT STRUCTURAL ENGINEER S2 ARCHITECTS RESOURCE ENGINEERING GROUP 215 S. MONARCH STE. G-102 502 WHITEROCK AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224 T 970.544.4856 970-349-1216 F 970.544.4856 CONTACT: AUGUST HASZ CONTACT: JOSEPH SPEARS HASZ@REGINC.COM JOSEPH@S2ARCHITECTS.COM SOILS ENGINEER CIVIL ENGINEER H-P KUMAR SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC 5020 COUNTY ROAD 154 502 MAIN ST. #A-3 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 CARBONDALE, CO81623 970-945-7988 970-704-0311 CONTACT: STEVE PAWLAK CONTACT: JESSE SWANN SPAWLAK@KUMARUSA.COM JSWANN@SOPRISENG.COM MEP ENGINEER LANDSCAPE DESIGN RESOURCE ENGINEERING GROUP CONNECT ONE DESIGN 502 WHITEROCK AVE. 123 EMMA RD #200 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224 BASALT, CO 81621 970-349-1216 970-355-5457 CONTACT: AUGUST HASZ CONTACT: KATIE TABOR HASZ@REGINC.COM KT@CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NEW CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON A VACANT SITE. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 5, RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION, WITHIN PORTIONS OF BLOCK 9 OF THE ASPEN TOWNSITE, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL A: LOT 4 AS DESCRIBED ON THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT PAGE 022 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625. PARCEL B: (EASEMENT INTEREST) AN ACCESS EASEMENT TO PARCEL A (LOT 4) ACCORDING TO THE “ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT” CREATED BY THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT PAGE 22 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625 AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 1(A) OF THE SHARED ACCESS WAY AND DRAINAGE SYSTEM USE, MAINTENANCE AND EASEMENTS AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 AS RECEPTION NO. 647627 PHYSICAL ADDRESS(S): ADDRESS NOT YET ESTABLISHED THE AIA DOCUMENT A201 "GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION", LATEST EDITION, ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THESE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, EXCEPT AS AMENDED HEREIN. COPIES ARE ON FILE AND ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE OFFICE OF THE ARCHITECT THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS CONSIST OF THE AGREEMENT, THE GENERAL NOTES, THE SPECIFICATION, AND THE DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE COOPERATIVE AND CONTINUOUS. WORK INDICATED OR REASONABLY IMPLIED IN ANY ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SUPPLIED AS THOUGH FULLY COVERED IN ALL. ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT PARTS SHOULD BE REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY. ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES, AND SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF CRAFTSMANSHIP BY JOURNEYMAN OF THE APPROPRIATE TRADES. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE INTENDED TO INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL WORK DESCRIBED HEREIN. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT ANY CONDITIONS WHICH WILL NOT PERMIT CONSTRUCTION ACCORDING TO THE INTENTIONS OF THESE DOCUMENTS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECT TO PROVIDE DETAILS AND/OR DIRECTIONS REGARDING DESIGN INTENT WHERE IT IS ALTERED BY THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OR WHERE NEGLECTED IN THE DOCUMENTS. ANY MATERIALS PROPOSED FOR SUBSTITUTION OF THOSE SPECIFIED OR CALLED OUT BY TRADE NAME IN THESE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLES WHEN REQUIRED BY THE ARCHITECT, AND ALL SUCH SAMPLES SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE ARCHITECT BEFORE THE WORK IS PERFORMED. WORK MUST CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED SAMPLES. ANY WORK WHICH DOES NOT CONFORM SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH WORK WHICH CONFORMS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. SUB-CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT REQUESTS AND SAMPLES FOR REVIEW THROUGH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WHEN WORK IS LET TROUGH HIM OR HER. REQUIRED VERIFICATIONS AND SUBMITTALS TO BE MADE IN ADEQUATE TIME AS NOT TO DELAY WORK IN PROGRESS. ALL REQUESTS FOR SUBSTITUTIONS OF ITEMS SPECIFIED SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE ARCHITECT AND WILL BE CONSIDERED ONLY IF BETTER SERVICE FACILITATES MORE ADVANTAGEOUS DELIVERY DATE, OR A LESSER PRICE WITH CREDIT TO THE CLIENT WILL BE PROVIDED WITHOUT SACRIFICING QUALITY, APPEARANCE, AND/OR FUNCTION. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL THE ARCHITECT BE REQUIRED TO PROVED THAT A PRODUCT PROPOSED FOR SUBSTITUTION IS OR IS NOT OF EQUAL QUALITY TO THE PRODUCT. SPECIFIED. ALL WORK SHALL BE ERECT PLUMB AND TRUE- TO-LINE IN ACCORDANCE WITH BEST PRACTICES OF THE TRADE AND MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PARTICULAR ITEM. A. B. C. D. E. F. G. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR HIS OR HER REVIEW WHERE CALLED FOR ANYWHERE IN THESE DOCUMENTS. REVIEW SHALL BE MADE BY THE ARCHITECT BEFORE THE WORK IS BEGUN, AND WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED SHOP DRAWINGS, SUBJECT TO REPLACEMENT AS REQUIRED FOR SAMPLES IN PAR. E., ABOVE. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR WHEN THERE IS NEED OF INSPECTION AS REQUIRED BY THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE OR BY ANY LOCAL CODE OR ORDINANCE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY AND CARE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS, AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL WORK UNTIL IT IS DELIVERED COMPLETED TO THE OWNER. ALL DIMENSIONS NOTED TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. DIMENSIONS NOTED "N.T.S" DENOTES NOT TO SCALE. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL OPENINGS THOUGH FLOORS, CELINGS, AND WALLS WITH ALL ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITEMS REQUIRING COORDINATION AND RESOLUTION DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS. VERIFY ALL SPACE DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN WITH EXISTING JOB CONDITIONS BEFORE STARTING CONSTRUCTION. WHERE WORK IS INSTALLED OR EXISTING FINISHES ARE DISTURBED, REFINISH SUCH AREAS TO MATCH EXISTING U.N.O. CHECK AND VERIFY CONTRAT DOCUMENTS, FIELD CONDITIONS FOR ACCURACY, CONFIRMING THAT ALL WORK IS BUILDABLE AS SHOWN BEFORE PROCEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THESE OR OTHER COORDINATION QUESTIONS, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING CLARIFICATION WITH THE ARCHITECT BEFORE PROCEDING WITH WORK OR RELATED WORK IN QUESTION. EACH MISCELLANEOUS ITEM OF CUTTING, PATCHING, OR FITTING IS NOT NECESSARILY INDIVIDUALLY DESCRIBED HEREIN. NO SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF CUTTING, PATCHING, OR FITTING REQUIRED TO PROPERLY ACCOMODATE THE SCOPE OF WORK SHALL RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PERFORM SUCH WORK AS REQUIRED. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE INTENT OF THE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS ARE TO BE CLARIFIED WITH THE ARCHITECT BEFORE ORDERING MATERIALS OR PROCEDING WITH THE WORK IN QUESTION OR RELATED WORK. ALL ITEMS ARE NEW UNLESS CALLED OUT AS "EXISTING". H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. R. S. PROJECT NORTH ARROW 1 1 A COLUMN GRID DESIGNATION # X-### # X-### X-### # X-##### # # 101b 1 BUILDING SECTION REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER WALL SECTION REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER DETAIL REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER INTERIOR ELEVATION REFERENCE DRAWING NUMBER DOOR NUMBER (IF MORE THAN ONE DOOR PER ROOM SUB LETTERS ARE USED REVISION REFERENCE NEW OR REQUIRED POINT ELEVATION EXISTING CONTOURS ELEVATION ON HIGH SIDE NEW OR REQUIRED POINT ELEVATION308320 WINDOW TYPE BUILDING ASSEMBLY TAGR1 1i LEVEL LINE VIEW NAME 1/8" = 1'-0"23 DRAWING TITLE AND SCALE ?ST-01 MATERIAL TAG ROOM NAME 101 ASSEMBLY TITLE AND SCALE ROOM NAME AND NUMBER 23 VIEW NAME 1/8" = 1'-0" XX#PLUMBING FIXTURE TAG XX#EQUIPMENT TAG LIGHT FIXTURE TAGLF-01 Name Elevation ABV.ABOVE A.F.F.ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ACC.ACCESS ACC.FL.ACCESS FLOOR A.P.ACCES PANEL ACOUS.ACOUSTICAL AC.PL.ACOUSTICAL PLASTER ACT ACOUSTICAL TILE ACR.PL ACRYLIC PLASTER ADD.ADDENDUM ADH.ADHESIVE ADJUST. ADJUSTABLE AGG.AGGREGATE A/C AIR CONDITIONING ALT.ALTERNATE ALUM.ALUMINUM ANCH.ANCHOR, ANCHORAGE ANOD.ANODIZED APPROX APPROXIMATE ARCH.ARCHITECT(URAL) A.D.AREA DRAIN ASB.ASBESTOS ASPH.ASPHALT A.T.ASPHALT TILE AUTO. AUTOMATIC BSMT.BASEMENT BRG.BEARING B.PL.BEARING PLATE BD.JT.BED JOINT BCH.MK BENCH MARK BTWN.BETWEEN BEV.BEVEL(ED) BITUM.BITUMINOUS BLK.BLOCK BLKG BLOCKING BD.BOARD B.S.BOTH SIDES B.W.BOTH WAYS BTM.BOTTOM BRK.BRICK BRZ.BRONZE BLDG.BUILDING B.U.R.BUILT UP ROOFING B.BD.BULLETIN BOARD CAB.CABINET CPT.CARPET CSMT.CASEMENT C.I.P CAST IN PLACE C.B.CATCH BASIN CK.CAULK(ING) CLG.CEILING CLG.HT CEILING HEIGHT CEM.CEMENT CM CENTIMETER CER.CERAMIC C.T.CERMIC TILE C.M.T.CERAMIC MOSAIC TILE CH.BD.CHARLK BOARD CHAM.CHAMFER(ED) CHRO.CHROMIUM CLR.CLEAR(ANCE) CLO.CLOSET COL.COLUMN COMB.COMBINATION COMP'T COMPARTMENT COMP.COMPOSITION COMPR.COMPRESS(ED)(ION) CONC CONCRETE C.M.U.CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONST.CONSTRUCTION CONTIN.CONTINUOUS CONT'R CONTRACT/CONTRACTOR C.L.L.CONTRACT LIMITLINE C.JT.CONTROL JOINT CPR.COPPER C.G.CORNER GUARD CORR.CORRUGATED CTR.COUNTER C.FL.COUNTER FLASHING CTR.SK.COUNTER SUNK CRS.COURSE CU.FT.CUBIC FOOT CU.YD.CUBIC YARD DPR.DAMPER D.P.DAMPPROOFING D.L.DEAD LOAD DEMOL.DEMOLISH DEP.DEPRESS(ED) DT.DETAIL DIAG.DIAGONAL DIAM.DIAMETER DISPR.DISPENSER DIV.DIVISION DR.DOOR D.H.DOUBLE HUNG DN.DOWN D.S.DOWNSPOUT DRN.BD DRAIN BOARD D.T.DRAIN TILE DWR.DRAWER DWG.DRAWING D.F.DRINKING FOUNTAIN D.W.DISHWASHER EA.FA EACH FACE E EAST ELEC.ELECTRIC(AL) E.P.ELECTRICAL PANELBOARD E.W.C.ELECTRIC WATER COOLER EL.ELEVATION ELEV.ELEVATOR EMERG.EMERGENCY ENCL.ENCLOSE(URE) EQ.EQUAL EQUIP.EQUIPMENT ESC.ESCALATOR EXCAV.EXCAVATE EXH.EXHAUST EXIST.EXISTING EXP.EXPANSION EXT.EXTERIOR F.O.FACE OF F.BD.FIBERBOARD F.GLS.FIBERGLASS FIN.FINISH(ED) FIN.FLR FINISHED FLOOR F.A.FIRE ALARM F.BRK.FIRE BRICK F.E.FIRE EXTINGUISHER F.E.C.FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET F.H.S.FIRE HOSE CABINET F.PL.FIREPLACE F.P.FIREPROOF F.R.C.FIRE-RESISTANT COATING F.RT.FIRE-RETARDANT FLASH.FLASHING FLEX.FLEXIBLE FLR.FLOOR FLR.C.O FLOOR CLEAN OUT F.D.FLOOR DRAIN FLR.PL.FLOOR PLATE FLUOR.FLUORESCENT FLR.JT FLOOR JOINT FOUND.FOUNDATION FRG.FRAMING FR.AIR FRESH AIR F.B.O.FURNISHED BY OTHERS FUR.FURRED(ING) FUT.FUTURE GA.GUAGE GALV.GALVANIZED GSKT.GASKET G.C.GENERAL CONTRACTOR GL.GLASS GL.BLK GLASS BLOCK GL.C.M.U.GLAZED CONC. MAS UNIT GL.S.T.GLAZED STRUCTURAL TILE G.B.GRAB BAR GRT.GROUT G.W.B.GYPSUM WALL BOARD GYPC.GYPCRETE GYP.PL.GYPSUM PLASTER GYP.T.GYPSUM TILE HD.BD.HARDBOARD HDW.HARDWARE HDWD HARDWOOD HD.JT.HEAD JOINT HDR.HEADER HTG.HEATING HVAC HEATING/VENTILATION/ AIR CONDITIONING HVY.D.HEAVY DUTY HT.HEIGHT HEX.HEXAGONAL H.B.HOSE BIBB H.M.HOLLOW METAL HORIZ.HORIZONTAL HR.HOUR H.W.H.HOT WATER HEATER INCIN.INCINERATOR INCL.INCLUDE(ING) I.D.INSIDE DIAMETER INSUL.INSULATE(ING) INT.INTERIOR INTERM.INTERMEDIATE INV.INVERT J.CL.JANITOR CLOSET JT.JOINT J.F.JOINT FILLER JST.JOIST K.PL.KICK PLATE KIT.KITCHEN K.O.KNOCK OUT LBL.LABEL LAB LABORATORY LAM.LAMINATE LAV.LAVATORY L.H.LEFT HAND LGTH.LENGTH LT.LIGHT L.C.LIGHT CONTROL LT.PF.LIGHTPROOF LT.WT.LIGHT WEIGHT LMS.LIMESTONE LTL.LINTEL M.H.MANHOLE MFR.MANUFACTURE(ER) MRB.MARBLE MAS.MASONRY M.O.MASONRY OPENING MAT'L MATERIAL MAX MAXIMUM MECH.MECHANICAL M.C.MEDICINE CABINET MED.MEDIUM M.BR.MASTER BEDROOM MEMB.MEMBRANE MTL.METAL M.F.D.METAL FLOOR DECKING M.R.D.METAL ROOF DECKING M.THR.METAL THRESHOLD M METER MM MILLIMETER MWK.MILLWORK MIN.MINIMUM MIR.MIRROR MISC.MISCELLANEOUS MOD.MODULAR MLDG.MOULDING MT.MOUNT MTD.MOUNTED MOV.MOVE(ABLE) MULL.MULLION NAT.NATURAL N.R.NOISE REDUCTION N.R.C.NOISE REDUCTION COEFF. NOM.NOMINAL NONMET NONMETALLIC N NORTH N.I.C.NOT IN CONTACT N.T.S.NOT TO SCALE OBS.OBSCURE O.C.ON CENTER OPAQ OPAQUE OPG.OPENING O.W.JST.OPEN WEB JOIST OPP.OPPOSITE OPP.H.OPPOSITE HAND OPP.S.OPPOSITE SURFACE O.D.OUTSIDE DIAMETER O.A.OVERALL O.H.OVERHEAD PNT.PAINT PTD.PAINTED PNL.PANEL P.B.PANIC BAR P.T.DISP.PAPER TOWEL DISPENSER P.T.REC.PAPER TOWEL RECEPTACLE PAR.PARALLEL PKG.PARKING P.BD.PARTICLE BOARD PT'N PARTITION PVMT.PAVEMENT PERF.PERFORATED PERIM.PERIMETER PLAS.PLASTER P.LAM PLASTIC LAMINATE PL.PLATE P.L.F POUNDS PER LINEAL FOOT PL.GL.PLATE GLASS PT.POINT P.V.C.POLYVINYL CHLORIDE P.T.CONC POST-TENSIONED CONCRETE P.C.CONC PRECAST CONCRETE PLYWD.PLYWOOD P.S.F.POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT P.S.I.POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH PREFAB PREFABRICATED PREFIN.PREFINISHED P.S.CONC PRESTRESSED CONCRETE P.L.PROPERTY LINE Q.T.QUARRY TILE RBBT.RABBET RAD.RADIUS REF.REFERENCE/REFER TO RFL.REFLECT(ED)(IVE)(OR) REFR.REFRIGERATOR REG.REGISTER REINF.REINFORCE(ED) R.C.P.REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE REM.REMOVE RES.RESILIENT RET.RETURN R.A.RETURN AIR RVS.REVERSE (SIDE) REV.REVISION/REVISE R.H.RIGHT HAND R.O.W.RIGHT OF WAY R RISER RVT.RIVET RD.ROOF DRAIN RF.HCH.ROOF HATCH RFG.ROOFING RM.ROOM RO.ROUGH OPENING RB.RUBBER BASE RB.T.RUBBER TILE RB.ST.RUBBLE STONE SF.GL SAFETY GLASS SCHED.SCHEDULE SNT.SEALANT STG.SEATING SCTN.SECTION SHTH.SHEATHING SHT.SHEET SH.GL.SHEET GLASS SHO.SHORE/SHORING SIM.SIMILAR SKYLT.SKYLIGHT SL.SLEEVE S.C.SOLID CORE S.P.SOUND PROOF(ING) S.T.C.SOUND TRANSMISSION COEFFICIENT S SOUTH SPCR.SPACER SPKR.SPEAKER SPEC.SPECIFICATION(S) SQ.SQUARE S.STL.STAINLESS STEEL STD.STANDARD STA.STATION STL.STEEL STOR.STORAGE S.D.STORM DRAIN STRUCT.STRUCTURE/STRUCTURAL S.C.T.STRUCTURAL CLAY TILE SUSP.SUSPENDED SYM.SYMMETRICAL SYN.SYNTHETIC SYS.SYSTEM TK.BD.TACK BOARD TK.STR.TACK STRIP TEL.TELEPHONE T.V.TELEVISION T.C.TERRA COTTA TZ.TERRAZZO THK.THICK(NESS) THR.THRESHOLD T.PTN.TOILET PARTITION T.P.DISP.TOILET PAPER DISPENSER TOL.TOLERANCE T&G TONGUE AND GROOVE T.B.B TOWEL BAR T.O.C.TOP OF COLUMN T.O.CONC TOP OF CONCRETE T.O.F.TOP OF FOOTING T.O.J.TOP OF JOIST TRANS.TRANSOM T TREAD TYP.TYPICAL U.B.C.UNIFORM BUILDING CODE U.C.UNDERCUT UNFIN.UNFINISHED UR.URINAL V.JT.V-JOINT V.B.VAPOR BARRIER VAR.VARIES VNR.VENEER VERM.VERMICULITE VERT.VERTICAL V.G.VERTICAL GRAIN VIN.VINYL VIN.B.VINYL BASE VIN.F.VINYL FABRIC VIN.T.VINYL TILE WSCT.WAINSCOT W.T.W.WALL TO WALL W.H.WALL HUNG W.C.WATER CLOSET W.PRFG WATERPROOFING W.REP.WATER REPELLENT W.S.WATERSTOP W.W.F.WELDED WIRE FABRIC W WEST W.WIDTH/WIDE WDW.WINDOW W.GLS.WIRE GLASS W.M.WIRE MESH W/O WITHOUT WD.WOOD WD.B.WOOD BASE W.PT.WORKING POINT MASONRY: STONE VENEER CERAMIC TILE CONCRETE: CONCRETE BLOCK CAST-IN-PLACE AND PRECAST EARTHWORK: EARTH/SOIL STONE/GRAVEL FILL INSULATION: BATT/BLANKET RIGID SPRAY FINISH MATERIALS: ACOUSTIC TILE GLASS CAULK AND SEALANTS: SEALANT W/BACKER ROD JOINT FILLER WOOD: FINISH ROUGH FRAMING CONTINUOUS BLOCKING DISCONTINUOUS PLYWOOD PLASTER/BACKING: CEMENT GROUT W/METAL LATH GYPSUM WALL BOARD GLASS MESH MORTAR BOARD FLOOR COVERING: RESILIENT TILE FLOORING CARPET WOOD FLOORING SETTING BEDS: SAND/MORTAR METAL: ALUMINUM STEEL DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAME GENERAL NOTES LEGAL DESCRIPTION SYMBOLS PROJECT DIRECTORY ABBREVIATIONS ARCHITECTURAL SYMBOLS BUILDING LOCATION MAP INDEX NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONG1.1 INSIDE COVER 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION SHEET NUMBER SHEET NAME 03.05.2019 RDS01-GENERAL G1.0 COVER ● G1.1 INSIDE COVER ● G1.2 SURVEY ● Z0.1 LOT AREA / FAR / ZONING ● Z0.2 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS ● Z0.4 SITE COVERAGE ● Z0.5 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS ● Z.06 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS ● Z.07 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS ● 05-ARCHITECTURAL A1.0 SITE PLAN ● A2.0 LOWER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN ● A2.1 MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN ● A2.2 UPPER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN ● A2.3 ROOF PLAN ● A3.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ● A3.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ● A9.0 RENDERINGS ● ● = DRAWING INCLUDED ○ = DRAWING NOT INCLUDED 34 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOT 5 AS DESCRIBED ON THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 IN PLAT BOOK 122 AT PAGE 022 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF: SHEET 1 OF 1 LOT 5, RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 12 TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. WITHIN PORTIONS OF BLOCK 9 OF THE ASPEN TOWNSITE, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 (970) 704-0311 SOPRISENG@SOPRISENG.COM VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 2000' SEWER MANHOLE WATER HYDRANT WATER VALVE ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER TELEPHONE PEDESTAL CATV PEDESTAL GENERAL UTILITY NOTE 1. THE LOCATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED BASED ON UTILITY MAPS, CONSTRUCTION/DESIGN PLANS, OTHER INFORMATION PROVIDED BY UTILITY COMPANIES AND ACTUAL FIELD LOCATIONS IN SOME INSTANCES. THESE UTILITIES, AS SHOWN, MAY NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR FIELD LOCATION OF UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. EXISTING CONDITIONS LEGEND WATER MANHOLE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC GAS LINE WATER LINE SEWER LINE UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE ugug w w ssss ue ue utut SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT I, GEOFFREY R. KELLER, HEREBY CERTIFY TO: HAYMAX CAPITAL, LLC; STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY; ASPEN DRAGONFLY PARTNERS IV LLC AND FOREST LOOKOUT I LLC d,dd,/^/^EΗ/DWZKsDEd^hZszW>dΗ^&/Ez͘Z͘^͘ΑϯϴͲϱϭͲϭϬϮ;ϵͿEd,d/d/^DKEhDEd>E^hZsz^,Kt/E'd, LOCATION OF ALL SETBACKS, STRUCTURES, VISIBLE UTILITIES, FENCES, OR WALLS SITUATED ON THE DESCRIBED PARCEL AND WITHIN FIVE FEET OF ALL BOUNDARIES OF SUCH PARCEL, ANY CONFLICTING BOUNDARY EVIDENCE OR VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, UTILITIES MARKED BY CLIENT AND ALL DEPICTABLE EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY'S, COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE NO. 245174, OR OTHER SOURCES AS SPECIFIED ON THE IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT. THE ERROR OF CLOSURE FOR THIS PLAT IS LESS THAN 1/15,000. ______________________________________ GEOFFREY R. KELLER L.S. #37997 CURB STOP FOUND NO. 5 REBAR W/ALUMINUM CAP, L.S. 29408 FOUND GOVERNMENT MONUMENT, AS DESCRIBED FOUND MONUMENT, AS DESCRIBED SITE IRRIGATION VALVE DECIDUOUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE EDGE OF VEGETATION 1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 010 10 20 10 405 NOTES 1.DATE OF FIELDWORK: SEPTEMBER 25 - 26, AND OCTOBER 7, 10 AND 11, 2013. UPDATED JANUARY 26, 2015 AND MARCH 27, 2018. 2.DATE OF PREPARATION: SEPTEMBER - OCTOBER, 2013. UPDATED JANUARY, 2015; APRIL AND JULY, 2018. 3.^/^K&Z/E'͗Z/E'K&^ϳϱΣϬϱΖϮϰΗdtEd,EKZd,t^dKZEZK&ZE'Z^dd/KE^h/s/^/KE͕ MONUMENTED BY A 3/4" STEEL PIPE WITH AN UNMARKED CAP, AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 9, MONUMENTED BY A 3/4" STEEL PIPE WITH AN UNMARKED CAP. 4.BASIS OF SURVEY: THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PREPARED BY G.E. BUCHANAN, DATED DECEMBER 15, 1959; CITY OF ASPEN GPS CONTROL MONUMENTATION MAP PREPARED BY MARCIN ENGINEERING LLC, DATED DECEMBER 2, 2009; THE PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 22, 2013 AS RECEPTION NO. 599691; THE LAND SURVEY PLAT RECORDED JUNE 6, 2011 AS RECEPTION NO. 580311; THE AMENDED AND RESTATED PLAT OF RANGER STATION SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY 25, 2018 AS RECEPTION NO. 647625 (PLAT BOOK 122 PAGE 22); VARIOUS DOCUMENTS OF RECORD, AND THE FOUND MONUMENTS, AS SHOWN. 5.THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC (SE) TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. FOR ALL INFORMATION REGARDING EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND/OR TITLE OF RECORD, SE RELIED UPON THE ABOVE SAID PLATS DESCRIBED IN NOTE 4 AND THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, NO. 245174 WITH A DATE OF JULY 25, 2018. 6.PER ORDINANCE NO. 23 (2016) THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED AS MEDIUM DENSITY R-6: 6.1.MINIMUM FRONT YARD (FEET): PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS: 10. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: 15. 6.2.MINIMUM REAR YARD (FEET): PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS: 10. FOR THE PORTION OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING USED SOLELY AS A GARAGE: 5. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: 5. 6.3.MINIMUM SIDE YARD: 6.3.1.MINIMUM SIZE FOR EACH SIDE YARD: 5 FEET 6.3.2.TOTAL OF BOTH SIDE YARDS: 15 FEET, PLUS 1 FOOT FOR EACH ADDITIONAL 200 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LOT AREA, TO A MAXIMUM OF 25 FEET OF TOTAL SIDE YARD 7.BASIS OF ELEVATION: THE 2009 CITY OF ASPEN MARCIN CONTROL DATUM, WHICH IS BASED ON AN ELEVATION OF 7720.88' (NAVD 1988) ON THE NGS STATION "S-159". THIS ESTABLISHED A SITE BENCHMARK, AS SHOWN HEREON. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS TWO 2' FEET. 8.ACCORDING TO THE FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (08097C0203C, JUNE 4, 1987) THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN A FLOOD ZONE. 9.PER THE DOCUMENT RECORDED MAY 20, 1940 AS BOOK 167 AT PAGE 305 AND THE UNRECORDED CITY OF ASPEN RESOLUTION FROM THE REGULAR SESSION DATED MARCH 3, 1937, FRANCIS STREET BETWEEN BLOCKS 9 AND 10 AND THE ASSOCIATED ALLEYS HAVE BEEN VACATED. GRK 18060 11/20/2018 G:\2018\18060\SURVEY\Survey DWGs\Working Base Map\18060 BASE.dwg CABLE LINEucuc 35 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ZONING ALLOWANCE & PROJECT SUMMARY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE PARCEL # ZONE DISTRICT R-6 EXISTING ALLOWED ALLOWED (PRINCIPAL) (ACCESSORY)SETBACKS FRONT REAR COMBINED FRONT/REAR SIDE COMBINED SIDE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS CORNER LOT HEIGHT LIMIT 25' SUPPLEMENTAL BREAKDOWN INFO EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED OPEN SPACE % SITE COVERAGE ON-SITE PARKING NET LEASABLE/COMM SF N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AN/A 45% MAX N/A 2 4 LAND VALUE SUMMARY ACTUAL VALUE LAND IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL 10' 10' N/A 5' MIN. 23' N/A NO N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 273512428005 ZONE DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS NET LOT AREA R-6 LOT SIZE PER SURVEY (GROSS AREA) BASED ON SURVEY FROM SOPRIS ENGINEERING 7,465 SF REDUCTION FOR EASEMENTS REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES 0% - 20% REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES 20% - 30% REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES 30% - 40% REDUCTION FOR AREA WITH SLOPES > 40% NET LOT AREA 4,996 SF 2,469 SF N/A N/A N/A N/A ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA PER R6 ZONING, MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS BASED ON THE LOT AREA LOTS 3,000 - 6,000 SF ALLOWABLE CALCULATION UNIQUE APPROVALS VARIANCES EXEMPTIONS TOTAL ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA (NET FAR) GARAGE EXEMPTION FIRST 250 SF IS EXEMPT NEXT 251-500 SF EXCLUDE 50% OF AREA 3,208.88 SF (2,400 SF + 558.88 SF + 250 SF) REFERENCE 26.710.040 REFERENCE DECK EXEMPTION (ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA = 2,958.88 SF X 15% 443.8 SF EXEMPT REFERENCE 26.575020.D.7.Z-012 26.575020.D.7.Z-013 N/A 1 TDR (+250 SF) 4,996 SF - 3,000 SF = 1,996 SF / 100 SF = 19.96 * 28 = 558.88 SF 2,400 SF OF FLOOR AREA, PLUS 28 SQUARE FEET FOR EACH ADDITIONAL 100 SQUARE FEET IN NET LOT AREA (MAX 3,240) N/A DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.1 LOT AREA / FAR / ZONING 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 36 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS COMPLIANCE (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE) RDS SECTION 1. ARTICULATION OF BUILDING MASS 2. BUILDING ORIENTATION (1) STRONG ORIENTATION (2) MODERATE ORIENTATION d) OPTIONS d) OPTIONS CODE DESCRIPTION PROJECT RESPONSE REFERENCE THE FRONT FACADE OF A BUILDING SHALL BE PARALLEL TO THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, BOTH STREET FACING FACADES OF A BUILDING SHALL BE PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER THE FRONT FACADE OF A BUILDING SHALL FACE THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, ONE STREET FACING FACADE SHALL FACE EACH INTERSECTING STREET. (1) MAXIMUM SIDEWALL DEPTH (2) OFF-SET WITH ONE-STORY GROUND LEVEL CONNECTOR (3) INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AT REAR AND STEP DOWN A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN FIFTY FEET IN DEPTH, AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE TO THE REAR WALL. AN ACCESSORY BUILDING THAT IS COMPLETELY SEPARATED FROM THE MAIN BUILDING IS PERMITEED. A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE A PORTION OF ITS MASS AS A SUBORDINATE ONE-STORY, GROUND FLOOR CONNECTING ELEMENT. THE CONNECTING ELEMENT SHALL BE AT LEAST TEN FEET IN LENGTH AND SHALL BE SETBACK AT LEAST AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDEWALL ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING. THE CONNECTING ELEMENT SHALL OCCUR AT A MAXIMUM OF FORTY FIVE FEET IN DEPTH AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE TO THE REAR WALL. ACCESSIBLE OUTDOOR SPACE OVER THE CONNECTING ELEMENT IS PERMITTED BUT MAY NOT BE COVERED OR ENCLOSED. ANY RAILING FOR AN ACCESSIBLE OUTDOOR SPACE OVER A CONNECTING ELEMENT MUST BE THE MINIMUM REASONABLY NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SAFETY AND BUILDING CODE COMPLIANCE AND THE RAILING MUST BE 50% OR MORE TRANSPARENT. A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. IF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING IS TWO STORIES, IT SHALL STEP DOWN TO ONE STORY IN THE REAR. THE INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS AND ONE STORY STEP DOWN SHALL OCCUR AT A MAXIMUM OF FORTY-FIVE FEET, AS MEASURED FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL TOWARD THE REAR WALL. THE INCREASED SIDE SETBACKS SHALL BE AT LEAST FIVE FEET GREATER THAN THE SIDE SETBACKS AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. 4. ONE-STORY ELEMENT d) OPTIONS (1) PROJECTING ONE-STORY ELEMENT (2) LOGGIA THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE A ONE-STORY STREET-FACING ELEMENT THAT PROJECTS AT LEAST SIX FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE AND HAS A WIDTH EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWENTY PERENT OF THE BUILDING'S OVERALL WIDTH. THIS ONE STORY ELEMENT MAY BE ENCLOSED LIVING SPACE OR A FRONT PORCH THAT IS OPEN ON THREE SIDES .THIS ONE STORY ELEMENT SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 50 SF IN AREA. ACCESSIBLE SPACE SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED OVER THE FIRST STORY ELEMENT; HOWEVER, ACCESSIBLE SPACE OVER THE REMAINING FIRST STORY ELEMENTS ON THE FRONT FACADE SHALL NOT BE PRECLUDED. THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE AN OPEN LOGGIA THAT IS RECESSED AT LEAST SIX FEET BUT NO MORE THAN TEN FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE, AND HAS A WIDTH EQUIVALENT TO AT LEAST TWENTY PERCENT OF THE BUILDING'S OVERALL WIDTH. THE LOGGIA SHALL BE OPEN ON AT LEAST TWO SIDES AND FACE THE STREET. THIS ONE STORY ELEMENT SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 50 SQUARE FEET IN AREA. 3. BUILD-TO REQUIREMENT c) STANDARD AT LEAST SIXTY PERCENT OF THE FRONT FACADE OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL BE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK LINE. 5. GARAGE ACCESS A LOT THAT HAS ACESS FROM AN ALLEY OR PRIVATE STREET SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ACCESS PARKING, GARAGES, AND CARPORTS FROM THE ALLEY OR PRIVATE STREET. WHERE ALLEY ACCESS IS AVAILABLE, NO PARKING OR VEHICULAR ACESS IS AVAILABLE, NO PARKING OR VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL BE ALLOWED FORWARD OF THE FRONT FACADE. a. APPLICABILITY THIS LOT DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO AN ALLEY OR PRIVATE ROAD. ACCESS IS PROPOSED FROM 8TH STREET. 6. GARAGE PLACEMENT d) OPTIONS (1) SET BACK GARAGE (2) SIDE-LOADED GARAGE FORWARD OF STREET-FACING FACADE THE FRONT-MOST ELEMENT OF THE GARAGE OR CARPORT SHALL BE SET BACK AT LEAST TEN FEET FURTHER FROM THE STREET THAN THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF ANY STREET-FACING FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. A GARAGE OR CARPORT LOCATED FORWARD OF A STREET-FACING FACADE SHALL BE SIDE-LOADED. THE GARAGE OR CARPORT ENTRY SHALL BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET. FOR LOTS ON CURVED STREETS, THE GARAGE DOOR SHALL NOT BE PLACE ON ANY STREET-FACING FACADE OF THE GARAGE. 8. GARAGE DESIGN A GARAGE DOOR THAT IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ALLEY SHALL UTILIZE AN ARTICULATION TECHNIQUE TO BREAK UP ITS FACADEd) OPTIONS (1) TWO SEPARATE DOORS (2) APPEARANCE OF TWO SEPARATE DOORS A TWO-CAR GARAGE DOOR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS TWO SEPARATE DOORS A TWO-CAR GARAGE DOOR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH ONE DOOR THAT IS DESIGNED TO APPEAR AS TWO SEPARATE DOORS BY INCORPORATING A VERTICAL SEPARATING ELEMENT THAT IS AT LEAST ONE FOOT IN WIDTH. 7. GARAGE DIMENSIONS THE WIDTH OF THE LIVING AREA ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF A STREET-FACING FACADE ON WHICH A GARAGE IS LOCATED SHALL BE AT LEAST FIVE FEET GREATER THAN THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE OR CARPORT a. APPLICABILITY 9. ENTRY CONNECTION THE FRONT FACADE SHALL BE ORIENTED TO FACE THE STREET ON WHICH IT IS LOCATED A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL INCORPORATE A ONE-STORY ELEMENT ON THE FRONT FACADE. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-SIDE CONFIGURATION ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A ONE-STORY ELEMENT PER DWELLING UNIT. A GARAGE OR CARPORT SHALL BE PLACED IN A WAY THAT REDUCES ITS PROMINENCE AS VIEWED FROM THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, THIS STANDARD SHALL APPLY TO BOTH STREET-FACING FACADES. d) OPTIONS A BUILDING SHALL PROVIDE A VISUAL AND /OR PHYSICAL CONNECTION BETWEEN A PRIMARY ENTRY AND THE STREET. ON A CORNER LOT, AN ENTRY CONNECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO AT LEAST ONE OF THE TWO INTERSECTING STREETS. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY- SIDE CONFIGURATION SHALL HAVE ONE ENTRY CONNECTION PER DWELLING UNIT. (1) STREET ORIENTED ENTRANCE (2) OPEN FRONT PORCH AT LEAST ONE ENTRY DOOR SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. THE ENTRY DOOR SHALL FACE THE STREET AND SHALL NOT BE SET BACK MORE THAN 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. FENCING, HEDGEROWS, WALLS OR OTHER PERMITTED STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY TO THE DOOR. THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE A FRONT PORCH THAT IS OPEN ON AT LEAST TWO SIDES, A MINIMUM OF 50 SF, FACE THE STREET, AND HAVE A DEMARCATED PATHWAY THAT CONNECTS THE STREET TO THE FRONT PORCH. THE FRONT PORCH SHALL CONTAIN THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING. FENDING, HEDGEROWS, WALL OR OTHER PERMITTED STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY TO THE PORCH OR THE DEMARCATED PATHWAY. 10. DOOR HEIGHT c) STANDARD ALL DOORS FACING A STREET SHALL NOT BE TALLER THAN EIGHT FEET. A SMALL TRANSOM WINDOW ABOVE A DOOR SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED A PART OF THE DOOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS STANDARD. 11. PORCH HEIGHT c) STANDARD AN ENTRY PORCH OR CANOPY ON THE FRONT FACADE OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL NOT BE MORE THAN ONE-STORY IN HEIGHT AS DEFINED BY THIS CHAPTER. 12. PRINCIPAL WINDOW d) OPTIONS (1) STREET-FACING PRINCIPAL WINDOW (2) WINDOW GROUP A PRINCIPAL BUILDING SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE STREET-FACING PRINCIPAL WINDOW OR GROUPING OF SMALLER WINDOWS ACTING AS A PRINCIPAL WINDOW ON THE FRONT FACADE. DUPLEXES IN A SIDE-BY-SIDE CONFIGURATION SHALL HAVE ONE PRINCIPAL WINDOW PER DWELLING UNIT. THE FRONT FACADE SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE WINDOW WITH DIMENSIONS OF FOUR FEET BY FOUR FEET OR GREATER THE FRONT FACADE SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE GROUP OF WINDOWS THAT WHEN MEASURED AS A GROUP HAS DIMENSIONS OF FOUR FEET BY FOUR FEET OR GREATER. 13. WINDOW PLACEMENT c) STANDARD A STREET FACING WINDOW ON A BUILDING SHALL NOT VERTICALLY SPAN MORE THAN ONE STORY AS DEFINED BY THIS CHAPTER. 14. NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW LIMIT c) STANDARD A BUILDING SHALL HAVE NO MORE THAN ONE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW ON EACH FACADE OF THE BUILDING THAT FACES THE STREET. A SINGLE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW IN A GABLE END MAY BE DIVIDED WITH MULLIONS AND STILL BE CONSIDERED ONE NON- ORTHOGONAL WINDOW. 15. LIGHT WELL/STAIRWELL LOCATION c) STANDARD A LIGHT WELL, AREAWAY, SKYLIGHT, OR STAIRWELL SHALL NOT BE LOCATED BETWEEN THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF A STREET-FACING FACADE AND ANY STREET. 16. MATERIALS c) STANDARD THE QUALITY OF THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND THEIR APPLICATION SHALL BE CONSISTENT ON ALL SIDES OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY OR DUPLEX BUILDING. THE FRONT FACADE IS ORIENTED TOWARDS 8TH STREET A1.0 SITE PLAN A2.1 ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE: WE BELIEVE THE INTENT OF THE ARTICULATION OF BUILDING MASS IS MET WITH A LOWER ONE STORY ELEMENT AND PUSHING THE TWO STORY ELEMENT BACK SO YOU DON'T GET AN EXTENSIVE TWO STORY WALL. A1.0 SITE PLAN A2.2 PLAN A3.1 ELEVATIONS A3.2 ELEVATIONS AT LEAST 60% OF THE FRONT FACADE IS WITHIN 5' OF THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK A1.0 SITE PLAN THE LOGGIA IS RECESSED AT LEAST 6 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE. THE WIDTH IS ALSO MORE THAN 20% OF THE BUILDINGS OVERALL WIDTH. THE AREA OF THE LOGGIA IS 56 SF. THE LOGGIA IS OPEN ON 2 SIDES AND FACES THE STREET A2.1 PLAN A3.1 ELEVATIONS Z0.5 FLOOR AREA THE GARAGE IS SIDE-LOADED AND PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET A1.0 SITE PLAN A2.1 PLAN THE FRONT DOOR FACES THE STREET AND IS NOT BACK MORE THAN 10' FROM THE FRONT-MOST WALL OF THE FRONT FACADE. FENCING, HEDGEROWS, WALLS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES DO NOT OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY OF THE FRONT DOOR A1.0 SITE PLAN A2.1 PLAN A3.1 ELEVATIONS THE FRONT DOOR OPENING IS 8'-0" THE LOGGIA CANOPY IS < 10' IN HEIGHT A3.1 ELEVATIONS A3.1 ELEVATIONS THE GABLE END ON THE FRONT FACADE HAS A WINDOW THAT IS GREATER THAN 4' X 4' THERE IS A CLEAR BREAK BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND STORY. NO WINDOWS SPAN BETWEEN VISUALLY A3.1 ELEVATIONS A3.1 ELEVATIONS THE STREET FACING FACADE ONLY HAS ONE NON-ORTHOGONAL WINDOW, WHICH IS A MULLION DIVIDED WINDOW IN THE GABLE END A3.1 ELEVATIONS NO LIGHT WELLS, STAIRWELL OR SKYLIGHTS ARE LOCATED BETWEEN THE FRONT-MOST WALL AND 8TH STREET A2.1 PLAN THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE CONSISTENT ON ALL ELEVATIONS. STONE IS PROPOSED AT THE BASE WITH WOOD AND METAL ON THE UPPER LEVEL A3.1 ELEVATIONS A3.2 ELEVATIONS N/A N/A N/A N/A THE DOUBLE GARAGE DOOR HAS A 12" MULLION OR FRAME IN THE MIDDLE TO APPEAR AS SEPARATE DOORS A3.1 ELEVATIONS N/A N/A THE LIVING AREA WIDTH ON STREET FACING FACADE IS AT LEAST FIVE FEET WIDER THAN THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE A2.1 PLAN N/A DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.2 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 37 7466 SF SITE BUILDING COVERAGE 2033 SF SITE COVERAGE COVERAGE AREA 7466 2033 TOTAL SITE AREA BUILDING COVERAGE SITE COVERAGE PERCENTAGE (45% ALLOW.)27.2% DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.4 SITE COVERAGE 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 3/16" = 1'-0" SITE COVERAGE1 38 2367 SF 00 LOWER LEVEL A 71' - 10 1/2" 7' - 5"3' - 4"61' - 1 1/2"12' - 2 5/8"6' - 6 3/4"12' - 2 5/8"C 71' - 10 1/2"B31' - 0"D31' - 0"9' - 9"71' - 10 1/2" A 700.8 SF 9' - 9"71' - 10 1/2" C 700.8 SF 71' - 10 1/2"9' - 9"31' - 0" B 302.3 SF 20.8 SF 61' - 1 1/2"3' - 4"7' - 5" 41.0 SF 12' - 2 5/8"6' - 6 3/4"12' - 2 5/8"9' - 9"31' - 0" D 307.1 SF LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS) FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -LOWER LEVEL SUBGRADE LEVEL WALL LABEL TOTAL WALL AREA (SF)EXPOSED WALL AREA (SF) 700.8 700.8 TOTAL WALL AREA 2006.2 61.8 % OF EXPOSED WALL (EXPOSED/TOTAL) 3.08% 61.8 / 2006.2 A C SUBGRADE AREA CALCULATION (NET)(FAR) 72.9 2367.0 X .0308 302.3B 302.3D 2367.0 20.8 41.0 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS) 72.9 1660.5 1427.0 1530.0 NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF) MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF) UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF) TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 3175.6 5440.0 1543.0 2367.0 TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (SF)(443.8 ALLOW.) 15.2 459 + 443.8 = 15.2 DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ0.5 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" LOWER LEVEL - FLOOR AREA1 39 DN FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS) 72.9 1660.5 1427.0 1530.0 NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF) MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF) UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF) TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 3175.6 5440.0 1543.0 2367.0 TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (SF)(443.8 ALLOW.) 15.2 459 + 443.8 = 15.2 1543 SF 01 MAIN LEVEL 485 SF 01 GARAGE 56 SF EXEMPT, LOGGIA / PORCH 198 SF EXEMPT, DECK ABOVE FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -MAIN LEVEL 485.0 NONE NONE 198.0 (EXEMPT) 117.5 56.0 (EXEMPT) GARAGE FLOOR AREA (GROSS) COUNTABLE GARAGE FLOOR AREA (SF)485 - 250 NEXT 250 @ 1/2 = 117.5 FRONT PORCH AREA OVERHANG OVER 4' (COUNTABLE TOWARDS DECK) STRUCTURAL STEPS PATIOS 6" ABOVE GRADE UNENCLOSED AREAS BENEATH DECKS MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS)1543.0 EXEMPT PER 26.575.020.D.5: STREET FACING PORCHES SHALL NOT COUNT TOWARD DECK AREA EXEMPT PER 26.575.020.D.4.f): UNENCLOSED AREAS BENEATH DECKS SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM DECK AREA CALCULATIONS MAIN LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA (SF) 1660.5 NONE DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ.06 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL - FLOOR AREA1 40 713 SF 02 SECOND LEVEL 260 SF DECK 199 SF DECK 714 SF 02 SECOND LEVEL 53 SF EXEMPT, TOP OF STAIR 50 SF EXEMPT, TOP OF STAIR FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -PROJECT TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS AREA FAR (NET) AREA (GROSS) 72.9 1660.5 1427.0 1530.0 NET SUBGRADE FLOOR AREA (SF) MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF) UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (SF) TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (SF)(2958.8 SF ALLOW.) 3175.6 5440.0 1543.0 2367.0 TOTAL DECK FLOOR AREA (SF)(443.8 ALLOW.) 15.2 459 + 443.8 = 15.2 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS -UPPER LEVEL 103.0 199.0 UPPER LEVEL AREA OF STAIR EXEMPT EAST DECK UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA (GROSS) 1530.0 UPPER LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA (SF) 1427.0 260.0ROOF DECK 1530 - 103 = 1427 DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONZ.07 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" UPPER LEVEL - FLOOR AREA1 41 BB BD BE BC B1 B3 B2 BA A3A2 A1 AA AB AC AD A 1 4 D C 2 3 A3.1 1 A3.1 2 A3.2 1 A3.2 28TH STREET33' - 4" 10' - 0" FRONT SETBACK 10' - 0"SIDE SETBACK5' - 6"SIDE SETBACK17' - 6"D IT C H E A S E M E N T 1 0' - 0 "SIDEWALK791079097908790779067905790479037902 B SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT LOT 4 DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.0 SITE PLAN 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/8" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN1 42 A 1 4 D C 2 3 BEDROOM 13.5'W X 15'L 30' - 3"12' - 10"30' - 1 1/2" 73' - 2 1/2"7' - 9"24' - 7"9"33' - 1"SKYLIGHT ABOVESETBACK5' - 6"SETBACK17' - 6"SETBACK 10' - 0" DITCH EASEMENT 10' - 0" SKYLIGHT ABOVE TV ART ART TV TV BATH 5.5'W X 13'L BEDROOM 13.5'W X 15'L BATH 5.5'W X 13'L DEN 23.5'W X 30.5'L TV TV GYM 10.5'W X 13.5'L LAUNDRY 14.5'W X 8.5'L MECH 12.5'W X 8.5'L BATH 12.5'W X 7.5'L BEDROOM 12.5'W X 14'L B ARTART 1 EX1.0 2 EX1.0 DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.0 LOWER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" 00 LOWER LEVEL CONTRUCTION PLAN1 43 UP UP UP UP UP A 1 4 D C 2 3 33' - 1"7' - 9"24' - 7"9"73' - 2 1/2" 30' - 3"12' - 10"30' - 1 1/2" GARAGE 20.5'W X 22'L ENTRY 23'W X 8.5'L KITCHEN 14'W X 27'L DINING 9'W X 19'LREF OVENSETBACK5' - 6"SETBACK 10' - 0"SETBACK17' - 6"DITCH EASEMENT 10' - 0" DESKCOFFEE DW TRASH BBQ LIGHTWELL LIGHTWELL SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT CU CU ART ART ART OVERHANGLIVING 19.5W X 20'L MUD 8.5'W X 15'L PWD 3'W X 7'L BAR B PONY WALLLOGGIA RECESS 6' - 0 1/4"LOGGIA WIDTH9' - 5"23' - 7"5' - 3 1/8"7' - 10 1/2"1 EX1.0 2 EX1.0 101' - 9"102' - 9" 101' - 9" 101' - 9" DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.1 MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" 01 MAIN LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN1 44 DN DN A 1 4 D C 2 3 30' - 3"12' - 10"30' - 1 1/2" 73' - 2 1/2"33' - 1"7' - 9"24' - 7"9"MASTER CLOSET 7'W X 16'L STUDY/SITTING 9.5'W X 10.5'L MASTER BEDROOM 12'W X 19.5'L DECK 12'W X 19'LSETBACK5' - 6"SETBACK17' - 6"SETBACK 10' - 0" DITCH EASEMENT 10' - 0" MASTER DECK 8'W X 25'L ART ART ART TV TV MASTER BATH 9.5'W X 14'L GUEST MASTER 11'W X 15.5'L BATH 6'W X 15.5'L BEDROOM 11.5'W X 15.5'L BATH 5.5'W X 10'L CL 3.5'W X 4'L B FPHIGH WINDOWBENCH BENCH33' - 4" 10' MIN. 10' - 0"5' - 3 1/8"7' - 10 1/2"1 EX1.0 2 EX1.0 DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.2 UPPER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" 02 UPPER LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLAN1 45 A 1 4 D C 2 3 73' - 2 1/2" 30' - 3"12' - 10"30' - 1 1/2"33' - 1"7' - 9"25' - 4"10" / 12"10" / 12"10" / 12"10" / 12"SETBACK5' - 6"SETBACK17' - 6"SETBACK 10' - 0" DITCH EASEMENT 10' - 0" SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT B 33' - 4"10' - 0"7' - 10 1/2"1 EX1.0 2 EX1.0 DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.3 ROOF PLAN 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" 03 ROOF CONSTRUCTION PLAN1 46 MAIN LEVEL F.F. 101' -9" UPPER LEVEL F.F. 113' -3" ROOF 120' -9" 1 423 7' - 6"11' - 6"10" / 12"10" / 12"BOTTOM OF STRUCTURE9' - 9"GLASS RAILING LINE OF EXISTING GRADE GLASS RAILING WS-01 STN-01 WS-01 METAL CLAD SLIDING GLASS DOORS 33' - 4"10' - 0" 1' - 0" MAIN LEVEL - KITCHEN/DINING F.F. 102' -9" MAIN LEVEL F.F. 101' -9" UPPER LEVEL F.F. 113' -3" ROOF 120' -9" A DC 7' - 6"11' - 6"STN-01 PS-01 WS-0110" / 12"1 0" / 1 2"DOOR OPENING8' - 0"PORCH CANOPY9' - 6"B PS-01 HORIZONTAL SCREEN MAIN LEVEL - KITCHEN/DINING F.F. 102' -9"BREAK IN WINDOW2' - 0"BREAK IN WINDOW1' - 0"MATERIAL LEGEND WS-01 - VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING ST-01 - STONE VENEER PS-01 - PLATE STEEL DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION1 1/4" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION2 47 MAIN LEVEL F.F. 101' -9" UPPER LEVEL F.F. 113' -3" ROOF 120' -9" 1423 11' - 6"7' - 6"10" / 12"10" / 12"WS-01 BOTTOM OF STRUCTURE9' - 9"GLASS RAILING WS-01 CONDENSING UNITS PAD SKYLIGHTSKYLIGHT 33' - 4"10' - 0" STN-01 MAIN LEVEL - KITCHEN/DINING F.F. 102' -9" MAIN LEVEL F.F. 101' -9" UPPER LEVEL F.F. 113' -3" ROOF 120' -9" ADC 7' - 6"11' - 6"WS-01 PS-01 LINE OF EXISTING GRADE B PS-01 MAIN LEVEL - KITCHEN/DINING F.F. 102' -9" MATERIAL LEGEND WS-01 - VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING ST-01 - STONE VENEER PS-01 - PLATE STEEL DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION 1/4" = 1'-0" NORTH ELEVATION1 1/4" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION2 48 DRAWING DATE: 215 S. MONARCH SUITE G-102 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 p I 970.544.4856 f I 970.544.4856 ISSUE DATE ISSUE NAMENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.0 RENDERINGS 03.05.2019FOREST LOOKOUT -LOT 503.05.2019 RDS SUBMISSION WEST PERSPECTIVE WS-01 -VERTICAL WOOD RAINSCREEN EAST PERSPECTIVE PS-01 -BLACKENED STEEL ST-01 -STONE VENEER LOT 4 LOT 4 49 Residential Design Standards – Request Description Ranger Station Lot #5 is requesting a variance of the RDS standard Articulation of building mass. We believe we are providing an alternate compliance that meets the intent of the Articulation of Building Mass standard. 1. Articulation of Building Mass Project Response (Variance Requested): “Intent. This standard seeks to reduce the overall perceived mass and bulk of buildings on a property as viewed from all sides. Designs should promote light and air access between adjacent properties. Designs should articulate building walls by utilizing multiple forms to break up large expansive wall planes. Buildings should include massing and articulation that convey forms that are similar in massing to historic Aspen residential buildings. This standard is critical in the Infill Area where small lots, small side and front setbacks, alleys and historic Aspen building forms are prevalent. Designs should change the plane of a building’s sidewall, step a primary building’s height down to one-story in the rear portion or limit the overall depth of the structure.” · The current design “reduces the overall perceived mass and bulk” by having a projected one-story element and stepping back the two-story element. 215 S. Monarch Suite G-102 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: 970.544.4856 Email: joseph@s2architects.com 50 · The current design “promotes light and air access between adjacent properties” by stepping down to one-story along the side yard. · The current design “articulates building walls by utilizing multiple forms to break up large expansive wall planes” by having a projected one- story element and stepping back the two-story element. · The current design “changes the plane of a building’s sidewall” by having a projected one-story element and stepping back the two-story element. 2. Building orientation Project Response: Complies 3. Build-to-Requirement Project Response: Complies 4. One-Story Element Project Response: Complies 5. Garage Access Project Response: Complies 6. Garage Placement Project Response: Complies 51 7. Garage Dimensions Project Response: Complies 8. Garage Design Project Response: Complies 9. Entry Connection Project Response: Complies 10. Door Height Project Response: Complies 11. Porch Height Project Response: Complies 12. Principal Window Project Response: Complies 13. Window Placement Project Response: Complies 14. Non-Orthogonal Window Limit 52 Project Response: Complies 15. Light Wells/Stairwell Location Project Response: Complies 16. Materials Project Response: Complies 53 54 Residential Design Standards Administrative Compliance Review Staff Checklist - Single Family and Duplex Standard Complies Alternative Compliance Does Not Comply N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes B.1.Articulation of Building Mass (Non-flexible) B.2.Building Orientation (Flexible) B.3.Build-to Requirement (Flexible) B.4.One Story Element (Flexible) C.1.Garage Access (Non-flexible) C.2.Garage Placement (Non-flexible) C.3.Garage Dimensions (Flexible) Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review. Address: Parcel ID: Zone District/PD: Representative: Email: Phone: Page 1 of 2 Approved: (Approved plans/elevations attached) 55 Standard Complies Alternative Compliance Doesn’t Comply N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes C.4.Garage Door Design (Flexible) D.1.Entry Connection (Non-flexible) D.2.Door Height (Flexible) D.3.Entry Porch (Flexible) E.1.Principle Window (Flexible) E.2.Window Placement (Flexible) E.3.Nonorthogonal Window Limit (Flexible) E.4.Lightwell/Stairwell Location (Flexible) E.5.Materials (Flexible) Residential Design Standards Administrative Compliance Review Staff Checklist Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review. Page 2 of 2 Approved: 56 57 58 59 60 61 EThomas I Todd EXHIBIT HOLLAND& HART Phone (970)925-3476 Fax(970)925-9367 ttodd@hollandhart.com June 4, 2019 City of Aspen Planning &Zoning Commission c/o Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director Aspen Community Development 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Association--South Aspen Street Vacation Request Ladies and Gentlemen: Holland & Hart LLP represents Norway Island LLC, the contract purchaser of the parcels of land that comprise what is commonly referred to as the Gorsuch Haus project site, which was approved for development by the voters earlier this year. As part of this process, the voters approved the vacation of a portion of the east half of South Aspen Street where it abuts the Gorsuch Haus project site. Our client has reviewed the application of Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Association requesting the vacation of the western half of South Aspen Street where it abuts a portion of the Shadow Mountain Condominiums project site. Norway Island is generally not opposed to a vacation of a portion of the west half of South Aspen Street but our client requests that the area proposed for vacation be more limited in size to the area that includes the Shadow Mountain deck, pool and amenity areas, as shown on the attached graphic. In addition, we ask that conditions of approval for any vacation ordinance include the following items: • Reserved rights of way for skier access and for public access to Aspen Mountain, • Reserved easements and rights of way (both surface and sub-surface) for utility suppliers, and for construction and maintenance access to neighboring properties: and • Acknowledgement that future excavations and grade modifications for the Gorsuch Haus project site and for other projects will be taking place in the area, and that surface and sub-surface improvements for storm water, mudflow mitigation and other civil engineering elements will be installed in the area. T 970.925.3476 F 970.925.9367 600 East Main Street,Suite 104 Aspen,CO 81611-1991 www.hollandhart.corn HOLLAND & HART June 4, 2019 Page 2 (Note: These elements have been approved by the City of Aspen through the Gorsuch Haus Project Review Submission process and will be further refined in the forthcoming Gorsuch Haus Detail Review Application.). Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions. Very truly yours, Thomas J. Todd of Holland & Hart LLP TJT/sm cc: Norway Island LLC 12708639_1 Alaska 1 ntr<r,,, Uta! Colorado a'-1-I \Vashingtun.DC. Idaho _;d tq�>_i:c bVyorniny www.hcllandhart.com Gorsuch t Haus ; ° r !r a �° Pool J Shadow Mountain \� Gul- iv �a de-Sao a� Q IS R p EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROP RTY: _ Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC H ARING DATE: 20 �� STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: V Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid:U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district snap is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ___SlgnaI The foregoing "Affidavit of Noti e"was aanowle4ged be fore me this&-Iaay of ` ` , 201 , by �11�UNV NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE:Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Apartments:Major Subdivision for Vacation at Right-of.Way WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Public Headna:Tuesday,June 4,2019:4:30 PM Meeting Loeahon:Ciry Hall.Sister Cities room t 130 S.Galena SL,Aspen,CO 81611 /f Project Location: The wesledy half(37.66 leeq of 1 South Aspen Street from the southerly nphtof-way My commission expires: f I � V?) line of Hill Street extending south 210 Icet to the southem boundary of Shadow Mountain Village ` Condominiums. Description:The applicant is requesting a Major Subdivision to vacate the western half of South As- - pen Street(7,907 sq.ft.)to the benefit of the Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Apartments-This is a two step review Drocees with an initial Commission Notary Public dauon to the City Planning and Zoning Commission and a subsequent derision by City Council. Land Use Reviews Req: Major Subdivision .. Decision Making Body:mCiCityof Aspen Planning; AARIA RENEE ESPINOZA and Zoning Commission lora recommendation. Applicant:: Shadow Mountain Village Condo 611 More Information: South Aspen Street,Aspen.CO87611 NOTARY PUBLIC More Information: For fuller information re- lated to the project,contact Kevin Reyes at the City of Aspen Community Development Cape rtment,130 7 COLORADO S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970)429.2797,kov :ATE I: O F Published in the Times ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: .v OTARY ID 20184028029 Published in the Aspen Times Weekly May 16,2079 0000422922 'OPYOFTHE PUBLICATION �'y c.^MM)SSjoN EXPIRES JuLY 1o.2022 • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERSAND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 CITY OF • DEVELOPMENT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 20 STATE OF COLORADO ) SS. County of Pitkin ) hit f P'l ), � 1I I " (name, please print) being or representing an A licant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official Paper or paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. V Posting of notice: By posting of notice,which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof Materials,which was not less than twenty two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) Inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the JL0 _day of Il/ , 20J C to and including the date and time of the public hearing. 4photogroph of the posted notice(sign)is attached hereto: Mailing of notice. By mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department,which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E) (2) of The Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S mail to all owners of property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached,was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) March, 2016 City of Apen 1130 S. Galena St.1(970) 920 50501! CITY OF • DEVELOPMENT Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, To affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. the names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivision, Spas or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Development, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notices requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in anyway to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title,to whenever the text of this Title is to be amended,whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of new land use regulation, or otherwise,the requirement of an accurate survey map or other significant legal description of,and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real estate property in the ears of the proposed change shall be waived. However,the proposed zoning during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. i Signature The foregoing "Affidavit Notice" was acknowledged before me this p� day A of \I Y K/ 20 by NN WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL TARA L. NE SL ON I NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: STATE OF COLORADO NpTAR`l ID u^_0 1U�!iJi7 GL NiyCOmr,issi2ny1 Notary Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICES (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICED AS REQIURES BY C.R.S §24-65.5-103.3 ,March,2016 City of Apen 1130 S. Galena St. 0) 920 5050 i CITYOFASPEN City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street,Aspen,CO 81611 p: (970)920.5000 f: (970)920.5197 w: www.aspenpitkin.com NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Apartments: Major Subdivision for Vacation of Right-of-Way Public Hearing: Tuesday,June 4, 2019; 4:30 PM Meeting Location: City Hall, Sister Cities room 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO 81611 Project Location: The westerly half(37.65 feet)of South Aspen Street from the southerly right-of-way line of Hill Street extending south 210 feet to the southern boundary of Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums. Description: The applicant is requesting a Major Subdivision to vacate the western half of South Aspen Street(7,907 sq.ft.)to the benefit of the Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Apartments.This is a two-step review process with an initial recommendation by the City Planning and Zoning Commission and a subsequent decision by City Council. Land Use Reviews Req: Major Subdivision Decision Making Body: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation. Applicant: Shadow Mountain Village Condo Association, 809 South Aspen Street, Aspen, CO 81611 More Information: For further information related to the project, contact Kevin Rayes at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO,(970)429.2797, kevin.raye_s@cityofaspen.com. © BendonAdams Sid W i CITYOFASPEN City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen,CO 81611 p: (970) 920. 000 f: (970) 920.E 197 w: www.aspenpitkin.coni FOUND 4'WITNESS CORNER 105 REBAR AND E.1S'PLASTIC W Nh•�,1! Ls 10290 w 3)u. FOUND 05 REBAR AND 23' PLASTIC CAP F S.ASPEN STREET Sire e t LROWS.102/643 l 75.30'WIDE 41 PARCELA VACATED TO SNADOW�g aMOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS •� ,.� A ^ 7907SO.FT.• BLOCA SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE h £ 1 O CONDOMINIUMS o` "•I PLAT BR.3 PG.33 3 ~ d 3765' 37.65' O ORIGINALCENTERUNE ' O S.ASPEN STREET 1 � 1 Summit 2D.DStreE?t I i FOUND PS REBAR AND 1j' / PLASTIC CAP 1, LS.025947 / .y ti CONSERVATION PARCEL N RARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION,FIRST ED 3?[t n REG 8461107 ti CITYOFASPEN HATCH LEGEND ROW TO BE VACATED TO SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS —' AREA OF REVOCABLE ENCROACHMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF ASPEN AND SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS REC. 8543674 © BendonAdams •fit ''�'r*� •, J-°� ` t;� i' s •, , •' fi� -,4 , : . :=Ls% �r+V .� V6•-�,� a,d./f�rira,A1� � '�' 7T ,g j 'f. • •..�:M"'^, .� f q; ,. Illaa /� r ;OSI 14 • � - ;,.- '� .rte'::_, .. , , ':. .� ,• t mac• ..r� i* +t";:;+a! .h{'y ,,,777iii7TT hof - .. - '�• •'• �' . .f'� x ..l -f•G- A J ' IJ y ♦iy..• ..,fb.,. ` �• :�� •�. .fa �' _ v 4y i _ r miff Ke � r 1 a, t��4 �" � ,^ � . J ��flt,`� ,, � \'( y� w x ,•'� rets .&* will a71►•. sr, E 1�iT'V1�T i• •�,. ,♦ t 1 �a V s I* 4 . x i k Iwo sk , Isk, , Yi •ti 1 Iwo 411• 'ter � • ` 'OM1-rA ` 1�� t Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius From Parcel: 273513124014 on 05/10/2019 tTKIN COU N r Instructions: This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. Disclaimer: Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com SHADOW MTN AERIE PTNRSHP LLP ROCK JANET RYAN GSJ CAPITAL LLC 21 BRIARCLIFF RD 1717-13 S OCEAN BLVD W296 N2979 FRANCISCA RD LARCHMONT,NY 10538 POMPANO BEACH,FL 33062 PEWAUKEE,WI 53072 TUCKER TIMOTHY&PATRICIA BROWN JAMES R JR SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDO ASSC PO BOX 2392 100 EASY ST 45 LISPENARD ST#6E 809 S ASPEN ST CAREFREE,AZ 85377 NEW YORK,NY 10013 ASPEN,CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN YEN RESIDENCE LLC KABERT INDUSTRIES INC 130 S GALENA ST 715 W MAIN ST#201 PO BOX 6270 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 VILLA PARK,IL 60181 RATAJCZAK ALLISON&DAVID MOORE GARY W JR BARBEE MARY K LIV TRUST 736 COURTENAY DR NE PO BOX 1219 625 SKYLINE DR ATLANTA,GA 30306 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 CODY,WY 82414 SILVER QUEEN#10 LLC KABERT INDUSTRIES INC HARVEY JEFFREY 37 WARREN ST PO BOX 6270 5825 S BLACKSTONE AVE#2 NEW YORK,NY 10007 VILLA PARK,IL 60181 CHICAGO, IL 60637 CAPTIVA SHADOW 9 LLC CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC 220 WATER ST#331 130 S GALENA ST PO BOX 1248 BROOKLYN,NY 11201 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASV ASPEN ST OWNER LLC YEN RESIDENCE LLC SPRING LANE INVESTMT LLC 1 POST OFFICE SQ#3150 715 W MAIN ST#201 8 OAK LAKE DR BOSTON,MA 021092109 ASPEN,CO 81611 BARRINGTON,IL 60010-5914 SM-15 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC EMERICK SHELLEY W 45000 S WOODLAND PO BOX 1248 2449 5TH ST CHAGRIN FALLS,OH 44022 ASPEN,CO 81612 BOULDER,CO 80304 BIEL ALEXANDER L LIFT ONE LODGE ASPEN LLC ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC PO BOX 2424 10877 WILSHIRE BLVD#2300 PO BOX 1248 ASPEN,CO 81612 LOS ANGLES,CA 90024 ASPEN,CO 81612 JSI ASPEN LLC DOUGLAS ELIZABETH R REV TRUST COPE SHADOW MOUNTAIN LP PO BOX 339 1717-13 S OCEAN BLVD N57 W30614 STEVENS RD SARASOTA,FL 34230 POMPANO BEACH,FL 33062 HARTLAND,WI 53029 RYAN STANLEY H LEONARD-PECK SHEILA KATHRYN RYAN TOBIN M 1717-13 S OCEAN BLVD PO BOX 375P 1717-13 S OCEAN BLVD POMPANO BEACH,FL 33062 VINEYARD HAVEN,MA 02568 POMPANO BEACH,FL 33062