HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20120904 AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, September 4, 2012
4:30 p.m. Sister Cities room
130 S. Galena Street, Aspen
I. ROLL CALL
II. COMMENTS
A. Commissioners
B. Planning Staff
C. Public
III. MINUTES
IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS —
A. 1110 Residential Design Variance, Stream Margin Review
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
VII. BOARD REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURN
Next Resolution Number:
P1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Sara Nadolny, Planning Technician
THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: September 4, 2012
RE: 1110 Black Birch Dr. - Stream Margin Review and
Residential Design Standards Variances Review
APPLICANT/OWNER: SUMMARY:
Aspen River Investor, LLC / The The Applicant requests the Planning and Zoning
Estate of Lenore L. Pogliano Commission approve the application for Stream
Margin and Residential Design Variances reviews for
REPRESENTATIVE: the demolition and replacement of the single family
Glenn Horn - Davis Horn Inc. residence at 1110 Black Birch Dr.
Keith Howie - Poss Architecture &
Planning STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning
LOCATION: Commission approve the application for Stream
Lot 11 Black Birch Estates, Margin Review, and the Residential Design Variance
commonly known as 1110 Black for building orientation. Staff recommends the
Birch Drive Planning and Zoning Commission deny the
Applicant's request for Residential Design Variance
CURRENT ZONING &USE related to the front door's location and its distance
This property is located in the Low- from the building's front fagade.
Density Residential (R-30) zone
district. This is a single family
residential unit.
s
PROPOSED LAND USE: ; t
The Applicant is proposing a
demolition and replacement of the
existing residential structure,
increasing the building from 2,509
square 'feet to 4,339 square feet of
floor area. The parcel is subject to
Stream Margin Review and
Residential Design Review.
Figure A: Photo of subject property
1
P2
BACKGROUND: 1110 Black Birch Drive was initially improved with a single family
residential dwelling in 1970. The lot is located on the south end of Black Birch Drive, on the
west bank of Castle Creek, just south of the confluence of the Roaring Fork River and Castle
Creek. The property is zoned Low-Density Residential (R-30). A ditch easement runs along
the northern edge of the property.
IC
c
Figure B: Vicinity Map
Existing Conditions
The total lot size is approximately 16,938 'sf. However, the area is subject to a reduction of
allowable floor area due to portions of the land being sloped and/or under water. Therefore,
according to a recent survey by Tuttle Surveying Services, the total net lot area of the property
is 12,703 sf. `
An irrigation ditch runs diagonally along the northwestern edge of the property, with a twenty
foot easement. The site is home to many large native trees.
Proposed Redevelopment
The Applicant is proposing to redevelop this parcel with a 4,339 sf two-story residential unit,
which is the maximum allowable floor area for the site. The development is proposed at two
2
P3
stories with no basement. Considerable effort has been made to work the design of the
dwelling around the existing trees on the site.
LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the
following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission:
• Stream Margin Review pursuant to Land Use Code section 26.435.040, Stream
Margin Review. An application for Stream Margin Review requires the Planning
and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, to approve, approve with conditions or
disapprove of the Stream Margin Review.
• Residential Design Standards pursuant to Land Use Code sub-section 26.410.020 (D)
Variances. Variances from the Residential Design Standards may be granted by the
Planning and Zoning Commission and consolidated with another requisite land use
review (Stream Margin Review, above).
STREAM MARGIN REVIEW:
This application is required to undergo Stream Margin review as the property is located within
100 feet of the high water line of a tributary stream (Castle Creek) of the Roaring Fork River.
This review has been deemed necessary by the City of Aspen in order to reduce and prevent
property loss by flood and to ensure the natural flow of the water body. Stream Margin
Review is generally a process that is handled administratively; however, the City's Engineering
Dept. has determined the top of slope to be different than that defined by the City's floodplain
maps. The public hearing process before the Planning and Zoning Commission will serve to
memorialize the location of the top of slope for this parcel.
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the Applicant's request
for Stream Margin Review.
Staff Comments
City Engineering Dept staff has determined the location of the top of slope for the parcel, and
the FEMA floodplain line as the high water line. The top of slope is the line that delineates the
bank of the body of water, may serve as the point for which all development must be set back,
and is the point from which a 45 degree plane is measured from that all development must fit
within. The high water line is the area where one could typically expect to find water on the
parcel, and may also serve as the point for which all development must be set back.
According to section 26.435.040 Stream Margin Review of the Land Use Code, all
development must be set back a minimum of 15 feet from the top of slope or the high water
line, whichever is more restrictive. For this proposal, the high water line is the most
restrictive line. The proposed building has been designed to be set back at least fifteen feet
from this high water line.
3
P.4
B 1'1kc Bi c0
Top of Slope
a Bled!7.493 q. R !n Boak 3.Page 244)
High Water Line
i C k from Top of Slope
O 775874
g
R PeaF T178•
/ o [ 15' setback from High
Water Line
WJ
�' 10'UtBIly Ememm! a
�Lh
- S1C Fd IC M-9 Nc1
LS Na 15710 •yO fw r- ,
21e
farad
HN.Vu.*mFimn Ctp
LS Na!3710
wo.Cana:
Figure C: Map indicating top of slope (Red), 15' setback from top of slope(Yellow), higi water line (blue), and 15' setback
from high water line(green)
Section 26.435.050 of the Land Use Code further states that all development must not exceed a
height delineated by a line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level at the top of slope.
The Applicant has provided a two-story design that meets this criterion.
A building envelope will be created and recorded for the western portion of the property
intended to provide further protection to Castle Creek, which will follow the required 15 foot
high waterline,setback. The remaining three sides of the property will be subject to the setback
requirements for the zone district. The proposed.design meets these requirements.
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCES:
This application is required to undergo Residential Design Standards review as the proposal
involves the demolition and replacement of a single family residence. The Applicant is
requesting two variances from residential design standards, which include:
• Building orientation. According to section 26.410.040(A) Site Design of the Land Use
Code, "the front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street... On
curvilinear streets, the front fagade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of
4
P5
the midpoint of the arc of the street." Black Birch Drive is a cul-de-sac style street,
and the proposed residential development has been designed such that the front fagade
is eleven degrees from the midpoint of the arc of the street.
• Building elements. According to section 26.410.040(D)(a) of the Land Use Code, "the
entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-
most wall of the building." In the proposed design, the front most wall of the building
is the mechanical unit that is attached to the garage. The entry door does face the
street, but is located approximately 28 feet back from the front-most wall of the
building.
Variances may be granted should it be found that an appropriate design or pattern of
development will result from the variation from the residential design standards.
Staff Comments
In regards to the building orientation, the Code states that the front facades of all principal
structures shall be parallel to the street. On a curvilinear street, such as the cul-de-sac of Black
Birch Drive, the front fagade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of
the arc of the street. The
proposed design includes a
front facade that is 11 BJ 1
degrees off of being
parallel to this tangent. °'°� •'° �`'N
The front facade and door
does face the street, and Q ; -
Staff feels that this
difference in orientation is `
so minor that it does not 3 0
affect the integrity of the
intent of the Code. Mk na" \
�rPeQx ms. ! J`
Therefore, Staff supports L� ,
this variance request. o� o
Figure D(right): Red �T
indicates the point that is
parallel to the tangent of the
cul-de-sac. B9� •
Yellow indicates 11 degrees cam a�
Ca-Of-VC
from being parallel to this °NgM757NOS \,. ,,5j
tangent ,e Ar ,32re
(,,,
5
P6
In regard to the second variance request, the Code states that the front door shall be no more
than ten feet back from the front most wall of the building. As proposed, the front wall of the
building is the mechanical unit wall that is attached to the east facade of the garage. The front
door of the building measures 28 feet from this front wall. The intent of this design standard
is to provide a clear and visible entryway to the residential unit, to provide a front entryway
that is prominent, and to create an element of uniformity among residential dwellings. Staff
finds the proposal to not meet the intent of the residential design standard. The door is set
back more than twice the distance required by Code, and hidden around the corner from the
garage. An examination of buildings within the neighborhood reveals a common development
design with doors that meet this standard; they are prominent on the building's front facade
and easy to find. Staff feels that the proposed design, with its deeply recessed front door, does
not provide a design that relates to the neighborhood in a similar way. This project is a
completely new development, and Staff feels that there are opportunities to produce a design
that does not require this variance. Staff does not recommend approval of this variance
request.
RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends that the
Planning and Zoning Commission approve the request for Stream Margin Review, for the first
request for Residential Design Variances regarding building orientation, and recommends
denial of the second request for Residential Design Standard Variances related to entry door
location.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: If the Planning and Zoning Commission chooses to recommend
approval for all of the requests, they may use this motion "I move to make a recommendation to
approve the requests for the Stream Margin Review and Residential Design Review for 1110
Black Birch Drive."
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Stream Margin - Review Criteria
Exhibit B - Residential Design Standards - Review Criteria
Exhibit C - Photos depicting neighborhood context
Exhibit D - Stream Margin Map
Exhibit E - Application
Exhibit F - Supplemental Letter from K. Howe, Poss Architecture
Exhibit G - City Department Referrals
Exhibit H - Public Notice
6
P7
RESOLUTION NO._
(SERIES OF 2012)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
APPROVING A STREAM MARGIN REVIEW AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
STANDARDS VARIANCES FOR LOT 11 BLACK BIRCH ESTATES SUBDIVISION,
COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1110 BLACK BIRCH DRIVE, CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO.
PARCEL ID: 2735-013-07-016
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application fiom the
owner of 1110 Black Birch Drive for land use reviews to demolish the existing residential
dwelling unit and replace it with a two-story residential dwelling unit; and
WHEREAS, the property is located along Castle Creek and is subject to the City's
regulations on stream margin development; and,
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has identified a Top of Slope and High Water Line for
this property as part of the review to indicate where development can occur and the Applicant has
submitted a variance request through Residential Design Standards and a request for Stream
Margin Review to develop the site as indicated in Resolution Exhibit A; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on September 4, 2012, upon review
and consideration of the recommendation of the Community Development Department,
presentation from the Applicant, and consideration of the proposal, the Planning and Zoning
Commission approves the reviews, with the allowances and limitations as outlined in this
resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO THAT:
The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the following land use reviews with the
following conditions:
Section l: Stream Martin Approval
A. The Planning and Zoning Commission grants Stream Margin Review approval for the
subject property. All new development within the development boundary shall be set
back fifteen(15) feet from the high water line, as identified by the City Engineer, and as
memorialized in a recorded plat.
B. No development other than native vegetation planting shall take place between the
building envelope on the Castle Creek side and the top of slope unless expressly
permitted by the City.
1
P8
C. In the event the event the development planned under this approval is demolished in the
future and the property is redeveloped, the building envelope created as a result of this
resolution shall be null and void and the property will be subject to applicable land use
reviews at the time of redevelopment:
Section 2: Residential Design Standards Variances
The Planning and Zoning Commission grants a variance from building orientation(Sub-section
(A)(1) and entry door location(Sub-section 26.410.040(D)(1)(a)) of the Land Use Code, as
shown on Exhibit A.
Section 3: Building Permit
A building permit application shall meet all adopted standards of the city. Additionally, a copy of
this Resolution and the plat approving the building envelope shall be submitted with the
application.
Section 4: Parks
A. An approved tree permit shall be required before any tree is removed or impacted under
the drip line of the tree. All tree permits must be approved prior to approval of building
permits, demolition or access infrastructure work takes place.
B. Parks will approve a final landscape plan during the review of the tree removal permit
based on the landscape estimates and appropriate plantings.
C. A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or
groupings of trees on site. This fence must be inspected by the City Forester or his
designee (920-5120) before any construction activities are to commence. No excavation,
storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, storage of equipment, foot or
vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree on site. There should be a location
and standard for this fencing denoted on the plan.
Section 5: Engineering
Development on the site must meet the requirements of the Urban Runoff Management Plan and
all of the adopted regulations of the Engineering Department. A plan depicting compliance with
this Plan shall be submitted at the time building permit.
Section 6: Vested Rights
This approval shall be valid for the greater of the three-year period of statutory vested rights, as
more precisely defined in the Development Order issued by the Community Development
Department, or until the City's Stream Margin regulations are amended. The period of statutory
vested rights may be extended pursuant to Chapter 26.308 of the Land Use Code. Until said
time, development on this property in compliance with this resolution may proceed to building
permit as allowed herein. After said timeframe, this approval shall be subject to any revised
provisions of the Land Use Code and may, based on a determination by the Community
Development Director,be subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
2
P9
Section 7•
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before
the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals
and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized
entity.
Section 8•
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 9•
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause,phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed
a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 4"' day of
September,2012.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
LJ Erspamer,Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Deb Quinn,Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian,Deputy City Clerk
Resolution Exhibit A: Site Plan
3
Resolution Exhibit A
Site Plan C)
B k Bi c
rc Gr nisi /nOookJ/Page244J Note:15'fromhigh water line
also serves as building envelope
line. All other areas are subject
/ iii " � G!u � �' V. A,��•�•
to the setback requirements of
the R-30 zone district.
fill
„f.Jsv \��y- (3' ,r'-T, �'1' i `;(—�}i,4ryro"y �`�•Y,•I ',.�'.
t ncrrb brr• -'Y,'r: / /•. N. `-1� 'y: �i ' r \�
`/ , �••: * `'' 1-, '1 ?ice `5 nN• �gij
O 77341x79 ,� n M'%� • '; �~ vJ
\\\ ,Iryy'tl 1• Ra°A a(•777P.7 7 I
x•�ar wn> rn UMAr Eu '
µ/Vi '�F• "!!' � h
rs Na r»to n9D*a c�J Af I rYo C` /i J `z 1 'rra.!A
f.S Jln.137!9
NtRiw Gant
Pil
Exhibit A
Development in Environmentally Sensitive Areas
See. 26.435.040.Stream margin review
Stream margin review standards. No development shall be permitted within the stream
margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a
determination that the proposed'development complies with all requirements set forth below:
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood
Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for
development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the State which shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised, including,but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques
on or off-site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the
development; and
Staff Response: The City's Engineering.Dept has determined that the development is
located outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area, therefore there will be no increase
on the base flood elevation. Please refer to attached Exhibit C which depicts the flood
hazard area. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable.
2. The recominendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open
Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway Plan are implemented in the
proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic
public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A
fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of
the river course shall be granted via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement;" and
Staff Response: There are no sections of the Aspen Area Community Plan that readily
apply to this project,as no trails or dedicated greed spaces exist on the property. There
are no areas of historic or public use that will be made available through this
development. No fisherman's easement has been determined by the City Attorney to be
enforceable with this proposal.
3. There is no vegetation removed.or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made
outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A -building envelope shall be
designated by this review and said envelope shall be designated by this review and said
envelope shall be recorded on a plat pursuant to Subsection 26.435.040.F.1; and
Staff Response:All landscape development proposed will fall within the building envelope.
No slope grade changes are planned for outside of the project's defined building
envelope. A specific building envelope has been designated for the western side of the
property, that which is closest to the Castle Creek waterway. The remaining
developable areas of the property will be required to adhere to the setbacks for the zone
1
P12
district. This envelope will be recorded on a plat pursuant to the Land Use Code. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the
river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during
construction. Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to
prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside
of the designated building envelope; and
Staff Response: The proposed development will be reviewed as part of the building permit
submission for compliance with the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan.
The Applicant has indicated that Best Management Practices will be followed during
construction in order to ensure effective erosion and sedimentation control relating to
Castle Creek. Drainage of pools and hot tubs will be contained within the designated
building envelope. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
5. Written notice is given to the Colorado.Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration
or relocation of a water course and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal
Emergency Management Agency; and '
Staff Response: There is no alteration or relocation of the Castle Creek water course
associated with this proposal Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable.
6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to
the developer and(his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying
capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and
Staff Response: There is no alteration or relocation of the Castle Creek water course
associated with this proposal, therefore, no guarantee of this nature is necessary. Staff
finds this criterion to be not applicable
7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the
100-year flood plain; and
Staff Response: This proposal does not anticipate any work to be done within the 100 year
flood plain. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable.
8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place
below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top of slope or the high waterline,
whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparian vegetation
and bank stability. New plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers and grasses) outside
of the designated building envelope on the river side shall be native riparian vegetation as
approved by the City. A landscape plan will be submitted with all development
applications. The top of slope and 100-year flood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork
River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community
Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department; and
Staff Response: The Applicant proposes only native vegetation to be planted within 15 feet
of the top of slope. A landscape plan has been submitted with this application and
approved by the City's Parks Department The top of slope and 100 year flood plain
2
P13
elevation have been determined by the City's Engineering Department prior to this
application. Staff finds this criterion to be met
9. All development outside the.fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not
exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from ground
level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the Community
Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section 26.04.100 and
method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020 as shown in Figure "A"; and
Staff Response: All development outside of the fifteen foot setback from the top of slope
complies with the height restriction that is delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five
degree angle front the ground level at the top of slope. The Applicant has included
images depicting the meeting of this criterion in Exhibit D of this packet Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
10. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or
located down the slope and shall be in compliance with Section 26.575.150. A lighting
plan will be submitted with all development applications; and
Staff Response: All exterior lighting for this proposdl will be mounted to the house and
will be downcast No lighting shall be oriented towards Castle Creek, and will comply
with Chapter 26.575.150 of the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met
11. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones.
Staff Response: This proposal includes a referral from Gary Reach of Reach
Environmental, LLC, that identifies the wetland and riparian areas on the lot. This
referral is included in Exhibit D of this packet. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3
P14
Exhibit B
Residential Design Standards
Sec. 26.410.040.Review Criteria.
Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet
this Section may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of
Adjustment or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the
requirements of Chapter 26.415. An applicant'who desires to consolidate other requisite
land use review by the Historic Preservation Commission,the Board of Adjustment or the
Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the variance application decided by
the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who
desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the
deciding board shall find that the variance, if granted would:
a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in
which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In
evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider
the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate
neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine
if the exception is warranted; or
b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific
constraints.
Staff Response: As part of this proposal the Applicant is requesting two variances from
residential design standards, which include:
1. Building orientation. According to section 26.410.040(A) Site Design of the Land
Use Code, -"the front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the
street... On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to
the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street." Black Birch Drive is a cul-de-
sac style street, and the proposed residential development has been designed such that
the front facade is eleven degrees from the midpoint of the arc of the street.
The front facade of the subject site faces a cul-de-sac private road. The shape of this
road provides some site-specific constraint related to the shape and form of the
building on the site. According to Section 26.410.040(4)(1) Building Orientation of
the Land Use Code, in regards to a curvilinear,street, the front facade of the principal
structure should be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. The
design is proposed at eleven degrees from this tangent. The Applicant is requesting a
variance from this residential design standard.
Staff feels that this request is reasonable; the front door does face the street, and Staff
feels that this minor difference in orientation does not affect the integrity of the intent
4
P15
of this section of the Residential Design Standards. Staff finds this application meets
the criterion for a site specific constraint(b, above).
2. Building elements. According to section 26.410.040(D)(a) of the Land Use Code,
"the entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10)feet back from the
front-most wall of the building." In the proposed design, the front most wall of the
building is the mechanical unit that is attached to the garage. As a result, the front
entry door to the building is located approximately 28 feet back from the front-most
wall of the building, more than twice the distance allowed by Code.
The majority of residences throughout the surrounding neighborhood have street
facing doors that are prominent on the front fafade of the building and are easy to
find (see Exhibit C, below). Staff feels that the proposed design does not provide a
front entry door that relates to the neighborhood in a similar way.
The site does pose constraints related to the position of the building envelope on the
site due to the 15 foot seback created by the high water line, the 45 degree angle that
all development must fit into as measured from the top of slope, and the number of
trees that are not eligible for removal on-site. However, this project involves a
complete demolition and replacement of the existing building on the site, and Staff
feels that there is the opportunity to provide a design that does not require a variance
from this residential design standard. Staff finds this application does not meet the
requirements related to either criterion above.
5
r� •�. nom' ; � r �;, � _ ,r/' ;�`
'. ` •� a� t: 1 is }4 ��. � C N ;j ,r
.f
9J _ ,may• l 1 1� I f/� .,,
�' al... �Y..•.tip �i`J � tiGf �G
Dial
?'�,,: ��• *'.tea
• :n1
C�
a�j11rti 5• y s 14t
7-
Y'
Lam, � � '6w�' � �.., .��e t ;fat ;��'�• .-s�t '- r�•?
yll
` ,k" 'K �� _r r ! r! y�� t. :• �.� :�•�
r,.
'( �J.n� �•.�� � �-t..l 'tom;�� �' � ! `��. }.11-.-�� • �� -}•3�i
+2
V
1 �
J
iN {l t
h,±
`if i p
be m'�1•g �.�.:
y
Av
nY'• :�..b fi � y
Exhibit D
1018+G /of
--- - _
1 017+00 1020/ O
ro2r�oo Stream Margin Map
1 EDGE OF RIO GRAND
TRAIL
FI1� ff f
Dashe Line I pe
J _r 00
;1x°o
`` 7032 -0 1 33f-OD_ �
R AD
_ BA C D
r SHOT T \
LOCA
IN
CONTO c
P19
poss
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(t)970/925-4755 (f)970/920-2950
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sara Nadolny
City of Aspen Planning Department
CC: Glenn Horn -Davis/Horn
FROM: Keith Howie
Bill Poss and Associates Architecture and Planning, P.C.
DATE: August 24, 2012
RE: Residential Design Standards Requested Additional Information Memo ® ENCLOSURE
Lot 11, Black Birch Estates
as requested by Sara Nodolny 08.23.12
Dear Sara,
Per your email,
An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the
deciding board shall find that the variance, ifgranted would.
a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the
development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is
used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development
with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board
feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or
b. Be clearly necessary for reasons offairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
Neighborhood context:
The neighborhood consists of single family residences constructed mostly in the last 25 years. The
properties in this area are relatively large by Aspen standards, usually bigger than 10,000 square feet in
size. The road that serves these residences is curvilinear in nature and the houses and building
envelopes follow the tangent alignment of the street. Due to the proximity of the Roaring Fork River,
the area is heavily forested with mature trees. The mature trees, the larger size of each property, and
the curvilinear access road all serve to separate the houses from each other, making each residence feel
like a single house surrounded by forest, and not part of an overall consistent streetscape, such as the
west end of Aspen. The curving access road with the required front yard setback combined with the
required offset from the steam setback, and the existence of ditch easements make the building
envelopes usually non-orthogonal. The houses are designed with view elements of each house facing
the river, with less prominence given to the relationship of the front fagade to the street. Thus, there is
not a consistent front fagade alignment that you would see in the west end of Aspen,where the building
sites are rectangular and of a consistent size.
P20
poss
Proposed residence:
a) The proposed residence is similar to the other development in the neighborhood in its context and scale.
The house addresses the street and still takes advantage of the river views.The house is broken down into
smaller scale elements to keep in scale with the other houses in the neighborhood.
b) The existing lot is bounded by a cul-de-sac on the west south side of the property that leaves a curved
building envelope line. On the east side of the property the setback is set by the FEMA, top of bank offset
line, and top of bank 45 degree angle plane.On the north side of the property there is a ditch easement that
further limits the building envelope. The design and landscaping of the house must fit into the resulting
envelope,which resembles a long Z shape with one small arm.The house, autocourt, and landscaping have
been designed to fit into this envelope shape and that also respect the existing mature trees on the site.
In response to the latest memo concerning staff approval for a variance for the front fagade more than 10 .
feet back from the front most building element.
According to the residential design standards 26.410.040 2,c
"On lots of at least fifteen thousand(15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport may be forward of the
front fagade of the house only if the garage doors are perpendicular to the street(side-loaded)"
The property is 16,938 square feet, so the proposed design qualifies for this exemption. This property does
not have an alley, so access must come from the private road. With the limited envelope, there is not
enough width on the site to place the garage within 10 feet of the main entry and still be able to access
these doors from the side. We have side loaded the garage doors from Black Birch Drive, to minimize the
presence of the garage from the street. The garage doors can't be perpendicular to the cul-de-sac because
you would not be able to access the garage with the turning radius of a car.The garage doors are single stall
and are going to be incorporated into the fenestration pattern of the siding, further minimizing their
presence. We have designed the garage with living space above it to incorporate the large mass required for
a garage in the house design. The current design allows you to back out from the garage and go forward
into the street, which further minimizes the potential for conflicts between pedestrian_ and automobile
traffic as dictated in the residential design standards. I am not sure how we are not meeting this standard.
Summary
We feel that we have addressed both the spirit and rtechnical points of the garage section of the residential
design standards by minimizing the presence and appearance of the garage doors from the street and
neighborhood. We feel that a variance for this development is appropriate as the project design stands on
its own merits and contributes positively to the streetscape of the neighborhood.
Respectfully submitted,
Keith Howie
Poss Architecture+ Planning
Exh� brC
Date: August 27 2012 P 21�
Project: Black Birch Residence
City of Aspen
Engineering Department DRC Comments
These comments are not intended to be exclusive,but an initial response to the project
packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting.
Drainage:
General note: The design for the site must meet the Urban Runoff Management Plan
Requirements. Staff was not able to detennine whether or not the site will meet these
requirements. A compliant drainage report and plan must be completed prior to final plat.
A compliant drainage plan must be submitted prior to final plat. This includes detaining
and providing water quality for the entire site. If the site chooses FIL, it can only be
applied to existing impervious areas all new areas will need to discharge at historic rates.
Staff was unable to detennine whether or not the site is able to meet the Drainage
Principals:
l.Consider stonnwater quality needs early in the design process
2.Use the entire site when planning for stonnwater quality treatment.
3.Avoid unnecessary impervious area.
4.Reduce runoff rates and volumes to more closely match natural conditions.
5.Integrate stonnwater quality management and flood control.
6.Develop stormwater quality facilities that enhance the site,the community, and the
environment.
7.Use a treatment train approach.
8.Design sustainable facilities that can be safely maintained.
9. Design and maintain facilities with public safety in mind.
Top of Slope:
.The plans did not include what proposed grading would occur to comply with the
City's Urban Runoff Management Plan. The site will not be able to utilize the 15
foot setback from top of slope to mitigate the site's impact on drainage. This
includes water quality and flood control.
Additionally only native plating can be done within the 15 foot setback from top of
slope as approved by the engineering and parks department. No additional grading
will be permitted within this area.
Construction Management—Engineering is concerned about the Construction
Impacts of this site. Please submit a construction management plan prior to
Building permit.
Fee in Lieu—This project is considered a Major project and can opt to pay the Fee in
P 2 2 Lieu for a portion of the detention requirements. Please refer to Section 2.12.140 of
the Municipal Code.
P23
Memorandum
Date: July 26, 2012
To: Sara Nadolny, City of Aspen Planning
From: Brian Flynn, Parks Department
Re: 1110 Black Birch, Stream Margin Review
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree Permit:
1. Per City Code 13.20 an approved tree permit will be required before any tree is
removed or impacted under the drip line of the tree. Parks is requiring that the tree
permit be approved prior to approval of building permits, demolition or access
infrastructure work takes place. If a permit is necessary, contact the Parks
Department at 920-5120 or download the permit at www.aspenpitkin.com on the
Natural Resource page, click on the 2012 tree permit tab.
2. Mitigation for removals will be paid cash in lieu or as an on-site planting per City
Code 13.20.
3. Parks will approve a final landscape plan during the review of the tree removal
permit based on the landscape estimates and appropriate plantings.
Tree Protection:
1. A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree
or groupings of trees on site. This fence must be inspected by the city forester or
his/her designee (920-5120) before any construction activities are to
commence. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill,
storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree
on site.There should be a location and standard for this fencing denoted on the plan.
This is critical and required at the 15 foot setback from top of slope.
P24
Tree Root Impacts:
1. As designed,the Parks Department is very concerned with the significant impacts
that will occur to the trees located along the south side of the proposed structure.
Excavation for the foundation will damage and remove structural roots of the trees
located on this side.
July 25, 2012, Staff met onsite with the design team and agreed to use specialized
foundation and excavation to preserve the root structures. The applicant agreed to
air spade the area and located the major structural root systems. Based on the non-
impact locations,piers would be installed around the roots and used to support
above grade - grade beams.
The existing stem wall will be preserved and used as a root protection barrier. All
new stem walls and engineered supports will take place behind the existing stem
walls.
Parks feels strongly that if these techniques are followed the structure can be
installed and constructed as designed. There will be additional mitigation
techniques required for the tree removal permit,these will be outlined in the
permit.
EA bitpy
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
t C9 (at.k 6WC1-% D4,V-P. , Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
L+�W P sue°► , 20�`�-- .
STATE OF COLORADO )
County of Pitkin )
r
f, (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that r 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 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. 1
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
and was continuously visible from 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
e e
prepaid U.S. 'Mail to all owners of property within thre 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 tl_ey
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hewing. A
copy of the miners and governinental agencies so noticed IS attached hereto.
(Continued on next page)
4 a
P26
Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map 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.
Signature
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this 177 day
of 0 ud- , 2017, by
PusucNOrlcE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
RE: I 1110 BLACK BIRCH DRIVE f
STREAM MARGIN REVIEW AND RESIDENTIAL v ®,e
DESIGN VARIAIXE"LAND USE REQUEST 10�f�..
�P.• �® commission expires: -J
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held on J,uasday,September 4,2012,at a S ••
meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m.before the Aspen
Planning and Zor•ing Commission,Sister Cities
Meeting Room,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,As-
pen �•y Public,
to consider en application submitted by As-
pen-River 1 ° '
Investor,LLC,c/o Chris LaCroix,Gar- t ,°® ��
field&Hecht,601 E.Hyman Ave,represented by ••;'
Glen Horn,Davis-Horn Inc.The applicant seeks to rs11••.,b
demolish and replace the existing single family
w..•.....•�C�`�..
residence,and is requesting the following devel-
opment approvals:Strean Margin Review,and
Residential Design Standard Variance. The prop-
erly is legally described as
Subdivision: Black Birch Estates Lot-11,
City Aspen,County of Filkin,Colorado,81611.
For further information,contact Sara Nadolny at the ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE"
City of Aspen Community Development Depart-
nenl,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970) 'UBLICATION
429.2739,Sara nadornv@ci aspen-co.us
s,LJErspamer
and Zoning Commission OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
Aspen Planning
Published in the Aspen Times on August 16,2012 WNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED
&Aspen Times Weekly on August 23,2012 0282151
rirrLtLA1Y1' CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
LS
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS Or PROPERTY: t"t1 r rl in
Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
I"
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, e.rY1 (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:
N R Publieation 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 copi)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
Oil they o clay of , 20.0'I? to and including the date and time
of the public hearing. , photograph'Qf the posted notice (.sign) is attached hereto.
✓ 1Llailing of noice. Bhe alof a notice obtained from te Comuitmy
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen(I5) 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. ,4
copv of the omiers and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
P28
Afineral Estate Oitlner 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 that
create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas,
and COWAPs are subject to tills notice requirement.
Rezoning oi•tov anzencbnent. Whenever the official zoning district map 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 tills 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 amenc gents.
Signature
The fore Q *ng"Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged bef re me tills ooday
of , 20V,,2-,. by
TNjj
e•° °. � WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
f 1p 1raRy
My onunis ' n ex)fires:
.t zT t lea ;�] ��
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
• COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
• LIST OF THE OTWERS AND GO VERN1IENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
B Y 11A 11,
• APPLICANT CERTIFICf1TIONOFjVIINEIML ESTAE 01MERS NOTICE
AS REOUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.3-103.3
16 11-1
�"1120�►�
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 1110 BLACK BIRCH DRIVE
STREAM MARGIN REVIEW AND
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN VARIANCE LAND USE REQUEST
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, September 4, 2012,
at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities
Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Aspen
River Investor, LLC, c/o Chris LaCroix, Garfield&Hecht, 601 E.Hyman Ave,represented by Glen
Horn, Davis IIorn hlc. The applicant seeks to demolish and replace the existing single family
residence, and is requesting the following development approvals: Stream Margin Review, and
Residential Design Standard Variance. The property is legally described as:
Subdivision: Black Birch Estates Lot: 11, City Aspen, County of Pitkin, Colorado, S 1611.
For further information,contact Sara Nadolny at the City of Aspen Conuilunity Development
Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970)429.2739, sara.nadolnyl,c ci.aspen.co.us
s/LJ Erspamer
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Daily News on August 17, 2012
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Aspen Account
.��.....� .....r.....o ...0- ` ------ - nxpube rop-up cuyo b
BL�5CK RCH DRIVE LLC BLACK BIRCH ESTATES LLC CAMPBELL MICHAEL
113 BIRCH DR 6925 HILL FOREST DR PO BOX 4468
ASAN,CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75230 ASPEN,CO 81612
CHARLES TIMOTHY JOHN CITY OF ASPEN HERNANDEZ LORENE M
CHARLES CAROLANNE CROTHERS ATTN FINANCE DEPT PO BOX 4468
1195 BLACK BIRCH DR 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN,CO 81612
ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611
LPRP RIVER LLC 00 MILL LLC 50% MORROW DARRELL C PITKIN COUNTY
11 %° 1120 BLACK BIRCH DR 530 E MAIN ST#302
1100 BLACK BIRCH DR
ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611
RED BUTTE CEMETERY SAUSSUS GUY&MARTINE 20% SAUSSUS PATRICK T 80%
PO BOX 194 3015 BRYAN ST#3A 8576 E MINERAL CIR
ASPEN,CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75204 CENTENNIAL,CO 80112
SCHULTZ ROBERT J TRUST SPIRITAS A/K 1991 TRUST UKRAINE LINDA W REV TRUST
1140 BLACK BIRCH DR 2900 N FITZHUGH#200 PO BOX 10844
ASPEN,CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75204-3204 ASPEN,CO 81612
S
Etiquettes faciles i peler A Repliez A la hachure afin de '
Utilisez le gabarit AVERY 5160® Sens de www.ave
chargement r6vcler le rebord Pop-up- j 1-B00-GO-AVERY
j
1
1
L c f
Du A
IME cx em.....:..:X-a.m-Ka!v.-.s+a-a. � —•�i-vvc.�r�� � ..
:rp
N5
A� .
3 .oa—
. ,�TLACE
y
RUM -
a
Eki.3.�,�
fi Z6— o47
IL
l
__. � 'vrss'_r.'�-a:.rt���-:�t a-L•zcaF'i.+,•.1�cas�aiSO�.�.-✓'e' �__ �-aw. '..
.V.
_ v.+mt. n +xN! Aga^maw*a�ryae�lafaR� '�
s s