Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20140401 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TUESDAY, April 1, 2014 REGULAR MEETING: 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 — March 4, 2014 and Work Session March 18, 2014 IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST V. PUBLIC HEARINGS — A. 1330 Mountain View Drive — Residential Design Standards Variances VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 4 Typical Proceeding Format, New Business 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clarifications 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications 9) Staff rebuttal/clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 10)Applicant rebuttal/clarification 11)Close public comment portion of hearing Fact Finding complete, Deliberation commences, No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12)Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed 13)P&Z discussion 14)Motion *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. Community Development Update March 2014 Project: 110 W Main - Hotel Aspen Contact: Sarah Adams Status: Pending Review by P&Z Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposes to increase the number of lodge rooms on the property from 45 to 53, add 4 new free-market residential units, add on-site affordable housing, and create an underground parking garage. The lodge rooms average less than 300 square feet. Update: The project's conceptual commercial design review was conducted by HPC on January 9, February 13 and March 13 and continued their review to April 24, when the project was approved. A hearing was scheduled for 10/15 before P&Z to review the application for PUD and subdivision reviews. The hearing for PUD and subdivision & rezoning reviews was continued to 11/19 before P&Z, at which time the Commission forwarded a recommendation of denial to Council, by a vote of 3:1, with one Commissioner abstaining from the vote. The case went before City Council for first reading on 12/9. Second reading was scheduled for 1/13. During the continuation hearing on February 24th Council asked the application to examine the height and size of the free market residential units. Council approved the conceptual application during a public hearing on March 10th Next Steps: The next hearing has been scheduled for April 15th before P&Z for Growth Management review. Project: 420 E Hyman (CB Paws/Zocalito) Contact: Sara Adams Status: Pending review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposes to redevelop the property at 420 E Hyman with a new three-story mixed-use building. Update: HPC approved the project on July 25th, 2012 by a vote of 3:2. City Council reviewed the application under Call-Up procedures and voted to remand the project back to HPC for further review of the mass and scale. HPC approved the massing on November 14th, 2013. The Applicant applied for subdivision and growth management reviews on February 15th. P&Z granted growth management approval by a vote of 5-0. This case was approved by City Council for Subdivision review on September 91h, 2013. The case went before HPC for conceptual design review on March 24tH Next Steps: HPC continued this matter until April 9th with instruction to revisit the design of the windows along the second story. Page 1 of 4 Project: 434 E Cooper Ave (Bidwell) Contact: Sara Adams Status: Pending Review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant is proposing to demolish and replace the building at 434 E Cooper, commonly known as the Bidwell building, with a new commercial building. No residential space is proposed as part of the redevelopment. Update: HPC approved the conceptual design on December 12th, 2012. City Council did not call the project up. Next Steps: The applicant is requesting a six month extension of vested rights to their conceptual approval. Project: 219 E Durant (Dancing Bear Ped Tunnel) Contact: Hillary Seminick. Status: Pending Review by P&Z Closing Date: Undetermined Description: The applicant proposes to amend prior PD approvals for both the Dancing Bear and Chart House to construct a subterranean pedestrian tunnel connecting the existing Dancing Bear Hotel (311 S. Monarch) to the former Chart House Lodge; where Dancing Bear plans to expand its lodge. Update: The applicant submitted the Land Use Application for the PD amendment on March 19, 2014. The Design Review Committee will meet on April 9, 2014 to discuss any potential issues. Next Steps: The applicant will meet before the Planning and Zoning commission seeking their recommendation for the proposed PD amendment on May 6, 2014. Project: Mountain House Lot Split Contact: Justin Barker Status: Pending review by City Council Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposes to subdivide the lot at 905 E. Hopkins into two fee simple lots of 6,000 sq. ft. each. The Mountain House Lodge currently spans the proposed parcels. Update: The project is scheduled for 1St reading before City Council on April 7, 2014 with second reading scheduled for May 12, 2014. Next Steps: None. Project: Miscellaneous Code Amendment Contact: Sara Adams Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Undetermined Page 2 of 4 Description: Planning Staff has drafted changes to the Calculations and Measurements Section of the Land Use Code to address sections that are outdated or unclear in their current language. Topics include exempting from floor area crawl spaces 4' or less in height and eave overhangs measuring 4' or less, removing the 15% deck exemption in certain zone districts in favor of a 10' setback from street facades, exceptions to height for light wells 100 sf or less in size, height allowances for permanent rooftop amenities, changes to the calculation of non-unit space, and clarification of the measurement of net livable and net leasable space. Staff drafted Code amendments which were presented to Council for policy resolution during the February 10th public hearing. Next Steps: Second hearing was continued until March 28tH Project: Lodging Study Contact: Jessica Garrow Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Winter 2013/2014 Description: One of City Council's 2012 Top Ten Goals was to "examine the desirability and sustainability of preserving existing lodging and producing more lodging in Aspen." As part of this effort, staff conducted a great deal of background work and stakeholder meetings to gain an understanding of Aspen's lodging sector. The background phase was completed in early May. All the reports are available online at: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Plannin__ Zoning/Long-Range-Planning/ In December, City Council identified three (3) goals to focus on: Enabling upgrades to condominium units while maintaining those units in the short-term rental pool, enabling upgrades to existing lodges, and enabling new lodge product. These goals were reaffirmed at a June 25th work session. Council has included a 2013 Top Ten Goal related to adopting a lodging incentive program. Update: City Council affirmed the goals related to supporting condominiums, existing lodges, and new lodges. Staff presented a detailed matrix of policy options at the June 25th work session, and Council prioritized changes to condominium and existing lodges. Staff presented specific recommendations to City Council as it relates to changes in Condominiums and Existing Lodges during the July 15th work session, and received direction to pursue the "Standard-Plus" option, with particular focus on ensuring any height and floor area changes are consistent with community character. Staff drafted Code amendments that were presented to Planning and Zoning Commission for feedback on February 18tH Next Steps: Council worksession has been scheduled for 3/3 with an open house to begin at 3:30 in the Sister Cities Room. Project: SCI Zone District Code Amendment Contact: Sara Nadolny Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Spring 2014 Page 3 of 4 Description: City Council requested staff to examine amendments to the SCI zone district to better address the current functioning of the zone. SCI is the only zone district that lists specific allowed uses (Coffee Roaster, for instance), rather than relying on general use categories (Commercial Uses, for instance). Update: Staff has met initially with business owners in the different SCI buildings, as well as with the P&Z to gain feedback on what goals they have for the zone district. Staff presented the findings and asked for initial Council direction at an April 23rd work session. Next Steps: Staff is working on continued outreach with SCI owners and businesses based on the direction from Council. Staff member Sara Nadolny is meeting with Wally Obermeyer to discuss the effects of changing the current SCI zoning to NC at Obermeyer Place on May 29th. A meeting with the representatives of Clark's Market is also planned, to discuss any potential impacts of rezoning the Ace Hardware-store-at N. Mill St. Station to NC. Staff expects to bring this before Council during a work session early spring. Project: ESA Code Amendment Contact: Jessica Garrow Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Summer 2014 Description: City Council requested staff to update the Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Chapter of the Land Use Code to simplify and clarify the review processes. Update: In March staff met with the Planning and Zoning Commission to get their feedback on potential changes. Staff is coordinating with the Parks and Engineering Department on changes related to the Stream Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, and 8040 Greenline reviews. Next Steps: Due to work load in the engineering department, staff has not had an opportunity to refine code language. Staff continues to make progress on this code amendment, and anticipates requesting formal policy direction from City Council in the near future. Page 4 of 4 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission March 4,2014 U Erspamer, Chair, called the meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members Tygre, Gibbs, Walterscheid, McNellis, Nieuwland-Zlotnicki, and Elliott present. Also present from City staff; Debbie Quinn,Jennifer Phelan and Sara Naldony COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Ms.Tygre said she stopped by the open houses at Aspen Square on her way to the meeting. There are 3 studios on the market. She said these are an example of the type of lodging that has worked for the past 40 years. She said Staff's hybrid units may be similar to these. They rent well and have been upgraded by the owners and are competitive. She said they are only 500 square feet. Mr. Erspamer said he had dinner with someone who works at the Limelight and they said they are busy in the off season. They have a Colorado rate and they are full. STAFF COMMENTS: Jennifer Phelan gave two dates for the commission training and the board agreed to the 3-18 meeting since so far there is no agenda item. Debbie Quinn suggested that at the training each member give a brief background so the members get to know each other. Ms. Phelan said that council gets their packets through a software where the info is uploaded and wanted to know if there is a preference for paper packets or going digital. Mr. Erspamer said he prefers paper. There was no interest from the commission in going paperless. Ms. Phelan asked if the commission still wants to receive the Community Development Update and they said yes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There are no public comments. MINUTES - February 18, 2014 Ms.Tygre made a motion to approve the modified minutes seconded by Mr. Elliott. All in favor, motion passed. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Mr. Gibbs recused himself from the public hearing for 431/433 W. Hallam St. Ms. Quinn explained what a conflict of interest is. Public Hearings - 431/433 W. Hallam, Residential Design Standards Variances - Continued public hearing Ms. Phelan stated the application was heard on January 7th but there was a limited board so the applicant's representative asked for a continuation to this meeting. This application is for 431/433 W Hallam St. Dylan Johns is the representative. The property is a duplex on a corner lot in the West End. The existing duplex is proposed for demolition with replacerbent of a new single family residence. The lot is 6000 square feet and does not have alley access. The residential design standards for lots with no alley access require that the garage be set back 10 feet further than the front most wall of the house. The design of garages are to have the look of being single stall doors or looking like single stall doors to break up the massing of the garage doors. The applicant is requesting not to be required to set the 1 Regular Meeting Planning& Zoning Commission March 4,2014 garage back the additional 10 feet but be flush with the side facade along 4th Street. They are also asking to provide a double door that matches the surrounding materials. Ms. Phelan stated the residential design standards are in place to preserve neighborhood character and to ensure homes contribute to the street scape and ensure parking is concentrated to the rear or side of each residence. The intent with garage doors is to minimize the presence of garages as a lifeless part of the street scape where alleys do not exist. There are a few standards to grant a variance including the board needs to determine an appropriate design considering the context and purpose on the neighborhood or be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site constraints. Ms. Phelan said Staff does not feel there are any reasons that create an unusual site constraint. It is a 6000 square foot lot with frontage on two sides of the street. She said the one finding you could possibly make is it is an appropriate design considering the context. Ms. Phelan stated there are a lot of different periods of development in this area. There is newer development that has access off of the street for driveways instead of alley access. There are also homes that have garages off the alleys. She stated the purpose of the standard is to minimize the visual impact of garages. The typical West End pattern is to have garages detached from the main residence. She stated with redevelopment Staff feels the standard should be met. The West End context overall warrants meeting the standard and Staff does not see this as having any type of unusual site constraint. She stated the applicant has shown that the standard can be met but prefer not to meet it. Staff is recommending that the request be denied. Mr. Elliott asked if the recommendation to deny is for both the set back and garage door materials. Ms. Phelan replied yes. Mr. Walterscheid asked if the Hallam side is considered the front yard and asked about an alternate front yard. Ms. Phelan said the front yard requirement is for Hallam, and 4th Street is considered a side yard. She said there is no longer an alternate front yard. She said the combined set back for this is a total of 15 feet with a minimum of five. The determination for front yard is the longest block face. She said the closer the garage gets to the set back the more potential you have for a car to be parked in front of the garage into the right of way. There are currently no sidewalk improvements there now but that doesn't preclude that one may be installed in the future. Mr. Nieuwland-Zlotnicki asked if the set back of the garage is currently from the front facade of the building not the edge of the street. Ms. Phelan said it is required from the front facade of the street facing wall. Dylan Johns, representing the applicant, said there is currently an encroachment of about 5 feet into the se back and an existing car port. He showed a neighborhood map indicating 11 lots that have a similar garage condition that they are asking for with this application. He said they feel strongly that the context in this environment is not counter to what they are asking for. He said there is a hardship to this property owner because they cannot take advantage of access to the alley. He said there has been some discussion about getting that access from the property owner with the empty lot blocking access, either with an easement or purchasing the land outright. He said at this point it is only a speculation. Mr.Johns stated as far as the second criteria of the design standard regarding being clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints they feel strongly that it is a site specific constraint and a hardship. From their perspective he said the definition of a hardship is being forced to do something due to circumstances outside of your control and not conforming to the typical situation that the rules are patterned after. He said there are not too many options as to how they reconfigure the house. He said they are able to do it but the property owner is having a pretty large loss of their outdoor area because the garage is being pushed back. He said this area of the West End is not 2 Regular Meeting Planning& Zoning Commission March 4,2014 a sidewalk attainment zone. He also said this particular lot is several feet above the street level and there is a noticeable slope. Mr.Johns said the attempt to camouflage the doors is to really reduce the presence of the garage from the street. He said if the commission prefers a two door solution they are fine with it. He said it is possible to keep the massing as it was and have the plane of the garage come across in the same way. He said Staffs opinion is based on what the code says they need to do but it is not about whether the code says you can or can't but whether the code makes sense to this application and if other factors apply. Mr. Erspamer asked what was added since the last presentation. Mr.Johns said he added the slide showing the pushed back version with the door face out to break up the facade. Mr. Erspamer asked how many of the 11 lots with the same configuration have been built recently. Mr. Johns pointed out several Victorians, a converted garage, a duplex and one built in the 70's. Mr. Erspamer asked Mr.Johns where he got the definition of hardship. Mr.Johns replied that is his understanding of the definition. Ms. Phelan said there is no definition of hardship in the code. Mr. Erspamer asked if there is an easement for a side walk. Mr.Johns said no. Ms. Phelan said there is public right of way of about 10 feet on either side of the curb. She said the property line is shared with the right of way. Ms.Tygre said there was a time when properties were redeveloped they were required to join a sidewalk improvement district. Ms. Phelan said she doesn't know anything about that. Mr. McNellis said from the roof plan it does not look like they are losing any yard space. Mr.Johns put up a diagram that illustrates the yard loss better than what was in the handout. He said the reason of pushing the upper mass forward is to get more sky. Mr. Goode asked if they did have access from the alley would they need the set back. Mr.Johns said if they had alley access the wall of the garage could go up along the front facade by right. Mr. McNellis asked in that situation would the material change on that side of the house be required. Mr.Johns said other than materials being used appropriately there would be no need. Mr. Erspamer asked if they could they make a fagade on the garage door to look like two doors without actually having two doors. Mr.Johns said they can and would be happy to do that if the commission didn't like the hidden concept. Mr. Erspamer opened the public comment. No Public comment. Mr. Erspamer closed the public comment period. Ms.Tygre stated Mr.Johns comment on how he interprets the code may apply to him but the commission needs to follow the code the way it is written. She said looking at A and B in the standards, the appropriate design or pattern of development considering context doesn't mean every single house that is existing has to have a certain context for it to be considered neighborhood context. The overall impression of the West End is one where we want to minimize the appearance of garages. The fact there are exceptions is not a convincing argument. She stated the second one about unusual site specific constraints refers to things like a creek running through or physical constraints not that the applicant bought a piece of property without alley access. She stated that was a choice and not a site specific constraint. She stated for those two reasons she has to support Staffs recommendation. Mr. Walterscheid said based on his understanding of how the lot is set up the garage does not face the front of the house and in his opinion where the code states"the part which shall be set back at least ten feet further from the street than the front most wall of the house". He said although it is facing the side street it is not facing the front of the house. He said he has done the same thing Mr.Johns is suggesting 3 Regular Meeting Planning& Zoning Commission March 4,2014 and would support him completely. He said he does find it site constrained because they do not get to access the alley as the rest of the neighborhood does. Mr. Erspamer said the question is, is this a hardship because there is no alley access. Ms. Phelan stated there are other lots in the West End that don't have alley access, Pearl Ct., North 4th St., Lake Ave. Mr. Walterscheid stated the garage doesn't face the front of the house. Ms. Phelan stated that Staff's opinion is that this is a corner lot with two streets and is applicable to any street facing facade. Mr. Walterscheid said the way he reads the code is it has to be 10 feet further from the street than the front most wall of the house. The front of the house is what is pointing up on the page, opposite the garage. Mr. Erspamer asked if it is a 10 foot set back for either street. Ms. Phelan said Staff would say whether the garage entry is facing Hallam or 4th the garage has to be 10 feet back from the wall along that street. Mr. McNellis said that Staff has interpreted that section of the code correctly. He said it does not matter what road it is facing. The 10 foot standard still applies. He said he agrees with Ms.Tygre that the standards are put in place because of some of the things seen around the neighborhood. He said he does not necessarily agree with them but that is what he sees when interpreting the code. He said with regard to the character of the siding he can see a hardship with the inability to access the alley. He said if they were able to access the alley they would be able to do what they want with the facade along that side. Mr. McNellis said he is more supportive of option#3 which has the recessed 10 foot garage but allows them to have a continuous material rather than two car ports. Mr. Erspamer asked why the set back was picked as 10 feet. Ms. Phelan said they are trying to create some relief along the facade with the garage being not as prominent along the streetscape. Mr. Erspamer said originally he was firm on the belief of Ms.Tygre but since the applicant can't access the alley along the side he asked if it would be possible to have it far enough back so the car is clear of any sidewalk. He asked if there is a compromise to the code. Ms. Phelan said the parking space requirement in the code is 18 feet. Mr. McNelllis said with a recessed garage the more space there is to allow a vehicle to be fully within the property is always a good thing. He said they would meet the standard of 18 feet with a recessed garage. Mr. Elliott asked what wall the set back is referred to. Ms. Phelan said the measurement is from the property line to the face of the building, structural frame. There are set back requirements based on front yard, rear yard or side yard. Mr. Erspamer said #3 is ok as long as there is one garage door with a fagade and would go with the 10 foot set back. Mr. Goode said he is in agreement with Staff. He said the owner could purchase the lot next door and there would be no need for the set back. Mr. Elliott said the property is not inexpensive so would that qualify as a hardship. Mr.Johns said purchasing the lot is not out of the realm of possibility but does not know how realistic it is. Mr. Nieuwland-Zlotnicki said when you purchase a corner lot it comes with some advantages but there are drawbacks. He said the set backs should apply to both sides since Hallam and 4th are both principle streets. Mr. McNelllis asked if this would have to go before HPC. Ms. Phelan replied no the West End is individually designated properties. Mr.Johns said it is difficult to know what is allowed and what will fit onto a site before a property is purchased. He said if this property was traditionally developed there would be more street frontage. 4 Regular Meeting Planning& Zoning Commission March 4, 2014 Mr. Erspamer said there are two decisions, one about the garage door and the set back of the garage. Ms.Tygre made a motion to deny resolution 2. No second, motion died. Mr. Walterscheid made a motion to approve resolution 2. No second, motion died. Raise of hand vote to see where the commission stands: who wants no ten foot set back—one vote Who is in favor of ten foot set back—six votes. Can there be a single garage door to make it look like two garage doors— Mr. Walterscheid said what they are approving is an alternate material to make it appear as one door. six votes Ms. Phelan said currently the one garage door variance is written so that the door materials match the surrounding materials and wants to be clear that the one garage door can have separate looking materials. Mr. McNellis said it could be separate materials or match the siding. Mr. Erspamer said he prefers to leave it to the applicant. Ms. Phelan said the motion will be to amend section one to deny variance 1a and 1b is granted with the change that it is a two car garage door that either matches the materials used surrounding the garage or alternative materials. Mr. Erspamer asked her to state it again and Ms. Phelan said it would allow applicant to build a two car garage door that does not need to look like a two stall door and there will be no language of materials. Mr. McNellis made a motion to approve resolution 2 as written with the changes to deny 1a and change 1b to have a two car garage door that does not need to look like a two stall door, seconded by Mr. Goode. Roll Call: Mr. Elliott yes, Mr. Nieuwland-Zlotnicki yes, Mr. Walterscheid Yes, Mr. McNellis yes, Mr. Goode yes, Ms.Tygre No, Mr. Erspamer Yes. Motion carries. 825 Roaring Fork Road - Residential Design Standards Variance Ms. Quinn said she has reviewed both affidavits of public notice, exhibit c, and they are appropriate. Sara Nadolny, planner technician, said the applicant is Charles and Elizabeth Koch Real Estate Trust and representing the project are Glenn Horn and Julie Maple. She stated it is a land use review regarding residential design standard. It is a residential West End property in the R15 zone district in the Second Aspen Company Subdivision. The property is undergoing a remodel of the front fagade and the applicant is requesting a variance from the standard that prohibits windows in the 9-12 foot area. The reason for the standard is to preserve the established neighborhood scale and character and promote the pedestrian experience. She stated the 9-12 foot zone is typically an area where a 2nd level would exist. The separation breaks up the massing of the building into two recognizable floors and reduces the bulk of the building. Ms. Nadolny said the applicant is proposing two windows at the front door location on either side of the transom. The transom is permitted by right in the code. The windows are approximately 4%feet wide by 2 feet tall. Only one foot of the height spans into the no window zone. She stated there are two criteria to judge a variance, either a hardship on the lot-site specific constraint or an established neighborhood character. She said this is a remodel and they are not finding any site specific constraints. She stated this is a very diverse neighborhood with different types of architectural styles. She said all of the homes in the neighborhood were built prior to the no window zone code which was included in the code in 2005. She stated the majority of the homes do not have this condition visible. 5 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission March 4,2014 She said it is not an established neighborhood character to base a variance on. Ms. Nadolny said if the windows are permitted they will create a larger glass frontage and there will be little to break up the front facade into two distinct levels. She stated it is new development and Staff feels if it is new development and the standard can be met it should be met. Staff is not recommending approval of this variance. Glenn Horn, representing the applicant along with Julie Maple, stated they are requesting two windows on either side of the door in the 9-12 foot no window space. He said the house is currently being remodeled and there is an active permit. He said the current design is for metal panels but if the variance is granted they will be changed to windows. Mr. Horn stated the code reads "provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context into which the development is proposed". He stated the commission may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures,the immediate neighborhood setting or broader vicinity. Mr. Horn said this portion of the West End is zoned R15 instead of R6 and the minimum lot size is 15,000 square feet. He pointed out that there is no alley and the design is dominated by the garages and driveways. He said people don't walk on Roaring Fork Road to get to the Music Tent or Harris Hall but use the pedestrian trail. Mr. Horn said the set back is 38 feet from the front door to the edge of the property. There are 34 spruce trees with a diameter greater than 8 inches. There are 19 aspen trees with a diameter 5 inches or greater. He said the trees tend to dominate the experience of a pedestrian on the street rather than the relationship to the house. Mr. Horn showed several photos taken from last week depicting the heavy screening from the trees. He said the only spot where the home is visible is from the driveway. He said the dominant character of the neighborhood is established by the vegetation and not the front facades of the buildings. Mr. Horn said one concern of Staff is the creation of a precedence if the variance is granted. He said you can differentiate this request from others due to the unique characteristics of Roaring Fork Road. He said given the neighborhood context they feel there is enough information that would warrant the variance for windows in the 9-12 foot space. Ms. Maple said for the client it is an issue of proportion and aesthetics. Ms.Tygre asked why glass. She said there is a lot of glass and asked why the client wants that much glass. Ms. Maple said it was originally glass. Ms.Tygre pointed out that the door was not glass. Ms. Maple said the client likes the transparency and likes to look out into the yard. Ms.Tygre asked about at night when the house has the lights on as to how much light comes out of the windows and door. Ms. Maple said there are shades on the windows and does not think there would be more light than there was before. Mr. Walterscheid asked if there is anything that limits the width of the transom to be the same width of the door. Ms. Naldony said the code states a transom is the window above the door. Ms. Maple stated they started out by asking for a taller door but that request was denied. She said they raised the roof to allow for the transom. Mr. Gibbs asked how far the roof above the door projects out. Ms. Maple said it is about 12 inches. Mr. Erspamer asked about creating precedence stating that P&Z has been told in the past that any decision they make does not set precedence for future decisions. Ms. Quinn said she is not familiar with that position. She said each application needs to be considered and there are ways to distinguish one from the other. 6 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission March 4, 2014 Mr. Erspamer opened the public comment. There was no public comment. Mr. Erspamer closed the public comment. Mr. Erspamer stated he is all for an administrative review but understands Staffs position. He said he is in favor for letting the applicant do these two windows, it is south facing and typical of other homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Goode brought up the argument that it is so hidden they should get the variance. When you start talking about code why bother having any code for the whole property. He said they can follow the code or not. Mr. Walterscheid said the immediate context of the entry door whether the windows in question are glass or metal there will be a window shaped object there. The intent to prohibit those two items seems extreme. If the code allows a transom above the door why wouldn't they be allowed to do a transom above the side lights. Mr. McNellis said he agrees with Mr. Walterscheid but he also agrees with Mr. Goode. He said he thinks the intent of the code applies to more Victorian architecture. He said personally he thinks windows would look better there. He said the entryway feature acts as the differentiation of the upper and lower floors. Mr. Elliott said the transom created the separation of the floors. Mr. Nieuwland-Zlotnicki said much of the code language is predicated on the pedestrian experience but given the vegetation,the set back and the more suburban nature the code does not necessarily apply for this area. Ms.Tygre said the fact the lot is so wooded and the windows would not be obvious to a pedestrian would affect her decision. She said she is concerned with light pollution but it is not one of the criteria. Mr. Walterscheid made a motion to approve request for variance as set forth in resolution 3. Seconded by Mr. Gibbs. Ms.Tygre said given the context of this particular wooded lot she would like to make a reference that this resolution applies to this specific lot and that they specifically met criterion A. Ms. Quinn said if they wish to amend, it can be done in the second to last whereas clause. Ms. Quinn said it would be a friendly amendment as long as it is accepted by Mr. Walterscheid and Mr. Gibbs. Roll call vote; Mr. Nieuwland-Zlotnicki yes, Mr. Elliott yes, Mr. Walterscheid yes, Mr. Goode yes, Ms.Tygre yes, Mr. Gibbs yes, Mr. Erspamer yes. All in favor, motion passed. Mr. McNellis made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Walterscheid. All in favor, motion passed. 7 Work Session Planning& Zoning Commission March 18,2014 Commissioners present- U Erspamer, 011ie NZ, and Brian McNellis. Present from Staff- Debbie Quinn, Jennifer Phelan, Hillary Seminick and Linda Manning. Debbie Quinn said that the items the Planning &Zoning Commission sees are typically local. Aspen is a home rule charter city. The land use regulations are our regulations. City Councils job is to adopt ordinances and resolutions and the municipal code is the authority and jurisdiction. Jennifer Phelan said originally the zoning rules were a police, health, safety and welfare issue. The land use code provides regulations for pud's, environmentally sensitive areas, green line review, stream - - - - margin, growth management and residential design standards. The P&Z is either the decision maker or a recommending body to Council. For items like subdivision and pud the P&Z is just a recommending body but for the others they are the decision maker. The review criteria is always included in the staff memo. Ms. Quinn said a judge rules the courtroom in a judicial capacity and the P&Z is quasi-judicial. It is their job to apply the rules and regulations. The meeting should be an orderly and straightforward process and the applicant has a right to due process. Anyone who appears before the board has the right to a fair and impartial board. She spoke about notice requirements for public hearings. The public has a right to appear and be heard. If the postings are not made it is not fair to the public and can undermine the entire process going forward. There are triple notice requirements; notice to neighbors within 300 feet, posted on the property and in the newspaper. The record contains the documents presented, minutes and everything that happens during the meeting. Ms. Quinn spoke about bias and ex parte communication. She said once the application is in you cannot discuss it outside of the meeting. The commissioners should not be engaged in conversations about the public hearings. You should not respond to emails other than saying thank you and forwarding it to staff for inclusion into the packet. If you are approached by someone it needs to be disclosed at the public hearing to avoid a conflict of interest. Ms. Quinn said the commission does have a right to reconsider after the meeting and before the next one. She said the commission needs to respect the decision of the group even if you are a member of the minority. She said the motion to reconsider needs to be by a member of the majority. She said she encourages commission members to talk to her before the meeting if they feel they need to recuse themselves. She said it would be a good idea for the new members to attend the City's ethic training. If there is a conflict of interest it should be disclosed before the public hearing. She said if an applicant claims a commission member is biased that should happen before the hearing. If it happens during the hearing the meeting may be continued. Jim True said the best thing to do is disclose and discuss with either him or Ms. Quinn. Ms. Phelan stated there needs to be a minimum of four members present for a quorum. If it is a split vote it results in a no action decision. The item may be continued to a future date, a motion to deny or tabled up to one year. Mr. Erspamer asked about questions from the media. Mitzi Rapkin is the public information person and you can go to her but Ms. Quinn said just be professional. Ms. Phelan said we will include the meeting procedure on the back of the agenda. She also spoke about site visits and there needs to be a public notice and included in the record. Ms. Quinn said since P&Z is quasi-judicial any evidence should be 1 Work Session Planning& Zoning Commission March 18, 2014 within the confines of the meeting. She said the site visit should be visual and there should be very little communication or discussion during the site visit. She said the commission can discuss it during the meeting. Ms. Phelan said there are sunshine laws that state if three or more officials are together on official capacity it must be noticed. Ms. Phelan said there are two parts to the meeting; fact finding and deliberation. There is the staff presentation then board questions and clarifications. The applicant presentation and then board questions and clarifications. Then the public comment section where the commission can also ask for clarifications from the public. Ms. Quinn said by code staff goes first. It is the applicant's burden to convince the commission. The commission should only discuss what is relevant. Mr. Erspamer asked about the meetings being extended past 7:00. Ms. Quinn said he can set the rules and set time limits to how long any one part of the meeting goes on. The chair should identify the issues to be deliberated by the commission. When the motion is made the criteria met or not met should be included. 2 MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Sara Nadolny, Planner Technician THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: 1330 Mountain View Dr. MEETING DATE: April 1, 2014 APPLICANT/OWNERS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Joseph P. Tallman Legacy Trust Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the variance request to REPRESENTATIVE: permit windows to span between the 9'-12' Ali Gidfar, Studio 303, Inc. zone, but deny the remaining requests related Michelle Frankel, Choreotect Studio to building orientation, garage doors, and front door location. LOCATION: 1330 Mountain View Drive The subject site is located in a neighborhood not typical of the west end area. The proposed CURRENT ZONING&USE: design could be found to work with design of R-15 zone district, Residential use the surrounding lots. Staff encourages members of the Commission to visit the site PROPOSED LAND USE: prior to the hearing to perhaps gain some The property will continue to be used insight into the context, or to look at the residentially. property in Google Maps—Street View. SUMMARY: The applicant requests the Planning and Zoning Commission approve four variances from the Residential Design Standards, 1) to permit street-facing windows that span through the 9'-12' area of the proposed building; 2) to allow the front door to measure more than 10' back from the building's front-most wall; 3) to allow the orientation of the building to conform to that of a curvilinear street rather than for a corner lot; and 4) to permit garage doors forward of the front wall of the house to be Figure 1: Image of subject property. side-loaded, but not entirely perpendicular to the street. Page 1 of 5 LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval: • Variance from the Residential Design Standards —pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020.D.2. Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review board for this request. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND: The subject property is located off of IL Cemetery Lane, outside of the designated Aspen Infill Area, at the corner of Mountain lit, Me View Drive and the North Street cul-de-sac. The parcel is Lot 5 of the West Meadows Y' Subdivision, which was originally approved in 1958 via the subdivision plat (Reception No. 106400). The lot was improved in 1978 with a single family home, which still exists today. The parcel is located in the R-15 zone v 44 district, and is 15,028 sq. ft. in size. In March, 2014 the Applicant received administrative approval for a boundary - adjustment between the subject parcel (Lot 5) F4 and adjacent parcel Lot 4. This boundary 40,g adjustment involved a 742 sq. ft. land exchange along the property line between the parcels, which resulted in a minor change in shape to the lots. The approval also • e documented prior survey errors including correcting the size of each lot, and locating a Figure 2:Location of subject property. prior survey error of 242 sq. ft. of land belonging to Lot 5. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant is proposing to demolish the 1,838 sq. ft. single family residence currently on the site and replace it with a new 4,849 sq. ft. single family residence. To permit the proposed design the Applicant is requesting four variances from the following Residential Design Standards: 1) building orientation; 2) garage doors to be perpendicular to the street; 3) front door to be located no more than 10' front the front-most wall of the building; and 4) windows are not to span into the 9'-12' zone, as measured from finished first floor. STAFF COMMENTS: The Residential Design Standards were created with the intent of preserving the established neighborhood scale and character, to promote the pedestrian experience, and to contribute to the streetscape in the neighborhoods throughout the City. Staff has examined each variance request in terms of the criteria for Variances from Residential Design Standards (Exhibit D). Page 2 of 5 There are two criteria to base a residential design standard variance request on — 1) Does the request provide an appropriate pattern of design based on the context of the surrounding neighborhood and the purpose of the particular standard, or 2) Is the request clearly necessary for reasons of fairness due to unusual site-specific constraints. Only one of the two criteria must be met in order for a variance to be granted. Exhibit B provides visual information regarding these variance requests. It is generally Staff's opinion that all new development will conform to the Residential Design Standards when such standards are able to be achieved. With that in mind, it is important to note that the proposed design was created based on early guidance from Staff, when it was felt that the lot was s' curvilinear rather than a corner lot. If this were a curvilinear lot the Applicant would not need to request variances related to building a orientation or garage doors. However, Staff has ultimately determined the property to be a corner lot, which causes this design to be non-compliant 1330 Motintilin View Dr.. and requiring a variance. MOUntain View Dr. Figure 3: Property as a corner lot At A. Building Orientation. Section 26.410.040.A.1 of the Code, states "The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street-facing facades must be parallel to the intersection streets. On curvilinear streets,the front fagade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street." The front fagade of homes in this neighborhood are oriented in the direction of the access point to each lot, even those on the North St. cul-de-sac. Each appear aligned to street in the manner described by the current Code. The Applicant has been granted access to the subject property on Mountain View Drive. This is a corner lot that does have some relationship to both streets. However, in finding this to be a corner lot, and keeping with the neighborhood context, the expectation is for this structure to be oriented toward Mountain View Dr. Furthermore, Staff does not find any unusual site-specific constraints that would warrant this variance. Staff recommends denial of this variance request. B. Garage Doors. Section 26.410.040.D.3.c states "On lots at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport may be forward of the front fagade of Page 3 of 5 the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side- loaded)." This is a 15,028 sq. ft. lot, permitting the garage to be in front of the house. As proposed, the garage doors would clearly meet the standard were the site curvilinear rather than a corner lot. Since the lot has been determined by Staff to be a corner lot, the garage doors fail to be perpendicular to the street. Street-facing garage doors are found commonly throughout this neighborhood. However, Staff calls attention to the second part of the variance criteria, the intent of the standard, which is to minimize the presence of garages as "a lifeless part of the streetscape." Staff does not believe that the urban fabric that pre-dates the existence of this standard should set the precedent to continue once a building is demolished. Furthermore, Staff does not find any unusual site-specific constraints that would warrant this variance. Staff recommends denial of this variance request. C. Entry Door Location. Section 26.040.410.D.1.a states "The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building." The Applicant has proposed a design where the entry door is located approximately 30' from the front-most wall of the building. Due to proposed design of the residence with the spread "arms" of the living space and the entry at the midpoint, the front door is highly visible and easy to find. However, this does not appear to be a feature typical to other homes in the neighborhood, and furthermore may not be a deviation Staff wishes to promote. The location of the door is also a function of the proposed design, and not a result of a hardship due to site-specific constraints. Staff recommends denial of this variance request. D. Windows. Section 26.040.410.D.3.a states "Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet(12) above the finished first floor." The Applicant has proposed four street-facing windows that span the 9'-12' zone. One of these windows is a transom above the front door, and is exempt from this standard. The remaining three windows are in line with the transom, with one to the left and two to the right of the transom. These windows measure approximately 1' in height and begin at 9' on the building as measured from the finished first floor. The purpose of this particular standard is to clearly delineate first and second stories of a building. The separation provides relief between stories and reduces the appearance of the building's massing. The windows are located on either side of the transom above the front door (a permitted feature). Furthermore these windows are located on a one-story feature of the proposed residence, so they clearly are not intended to appear as one large massing, as would be the case if there was a second story level at this location. Staff recommends approval of this variance request. Page 4of5 While the requested variances lend to an interesting and creative design for the proposed residence, it is Staff's duty to interpret and enforce the Code as written. Staff acknowledges that this property shares a relationship with both Mountain View Drive and North Street, and this is not a typical neighborhood within the City that follows a more linear design pattern such as seen around most of the west end. Staff anticipates a discussion regarding the practical application of the Code as related to the proposed building's orientation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds one of the variance requests to meet the first review criteria associated with Variances from the Residential Design Standards, but fails to find a strong connection between the criteria and the remaining three variance requests. Therefore Staff recommends approval of the request to permit windows to span between the 9'-12' zone, and recommends denial of the variance requests related to building orientation, garage door orientation, and front door location. The following Motion and attached Resolution are written in the affirmative, approving the request. The Planning and Zoning Commission must find the application to meet at least one of the necessary criteria associated with a Residential Design Standard variance request and therefore approve this application, approve the application with conditions, or find that the application does not meet the criteria, and deny the application. RECOMMENDED MOTION(ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve the request for a variance from the Residential Design Standard as noted in Resolution , Series of 2014." ATTACHMENTS: • EXHIBIT A—Site Plan • EXHIBIT B—Building Features related to Variance Requests • EXHIBIT C—Neighborhood Images • EXHIBIT D—Review Criteria • EXHIBIT E—Application Page 5 of 5 RESOLUTION No._ (SERIES OF 2014) A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN APPROVING FOUR RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOT 5, BLOCK 1 OF THE WEST MEADOW SUBDIVISION, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1330 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, CITY OF ASPEN Parcel Identification Number: 2735-013-08-006 WHEREAS, The Joseph P. Tallman Legacy Trust, as owner of 1330 Mountain View Dr., submitted a request for four Residential Design Standard Variances for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission for a land use review from the following standards: • 26.410.040.A.1 —Building orientation; • 26.410.040.D.3.c— Side-loaded garage doors; • 26.040.410.D.La—Location of entry door; and • 26.040.410.D.3.a— Street-facing windows spanning 9'-12' zone. WHEREAS, the property is located in the R-15 Moderate-Density Residential zone district and is Lot 5 of the West Meadow Subdivision; and WHEREAS, the subdivision plat for the property was originally approved by the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission in 1958 and is recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County at Plat Book 2, Page 245, Reception No. 106400; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the request and has submitted a recommendation of approval of one of the variance requests and denial of the remaining three variance requests to the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 1, 2014, 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 review as requested by the Applicant, finding that it meets the criteria as described in Subsection 26.410.020.D.2 of the Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The following shall be permitted, as indicated in Exhibit A of this Resolution: l a. The building shall be oriented to as if the lot were a curvilinear street, parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street; b. The garage shall be permitted side-loaded at an angle not perpendicular to the street; c. The front door shall be set back further than 10' from the front-most wall of the building; and d. Windows on either side of the street-facing entryway door shall be permitted to span through the nine (9) foot to twelve (12) foot area, as measured from the finished first floor. 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 plan 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 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 l st day of April, 2014. LJ Erspamer, Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: Debbie Quinn,Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Linda Manning,Records Manager Exhibit A: Site Plan 2 Resolution Exhibit A Site Plan OUT LINE AA .1 r G� O J a 1 /� 29'•3 � --i 1 i i g� 1 1 1 i 1 � � I 1 i l ! / L Boulder.Apple C Boulder,Colorado 80301 USA CUT LINE AA / CUT LINE AA tel 303 669 3370 � -� .wvwstudia30i.us dbbia nntvftl�lk,F-1ente.eprass tlesign mm�l onky.Fml en9naering III end ramirauan�nea,emain ma i _ �` nubility oflhe cd iacmr w : g. Agideas.designs. \ �� eirengam by Na-in6celed b peasented by tl, drawings are the I S➢eal1 fied ec oairneaacooneuiih tha I professional registrations I � I All GWarArtM1llec� Llcemu mnCers �1ry' I() NeowmCO o9_SE /?� NCAR9 126050 / - f seal&signature CUT LINE AA CUT LINE AA CIO j O FGA 2 Site Plan-North 1. Scale:118"=1'-0.. consultant name and address Fence<1=72"tall--� / `F,�L1�}��1 _ __ C �' / -- - original issue dates: Fence 4=72"tall--- / �� - schematic Design U 23 December,2013 o —Fence</=72"tall m - - revisions: 29'-31 " I b - — ,t � I project t Private Residence 1330 Mountain View Dr, ,I Aspen,CO drawing title I Site Plan - drawing scale tl8"=1'-0" drawing number Site Plan 1, scale:1/8"=l'-T' A1 .0 Exhibit B-1 Building Features Related to Variance Requests WT LUSAA CUT LIPEAA O - v O _, f i Variance Request#2— Garage is not perpendicular to street Variance Request#1— Variance Request#3— Front facade of building Front door is set back is not parallel to street more than 10'from front- most wall of building Exhibit B-2 Building Features Related to Variance Requests 9 L±j 5C LI 4........... .......... Variance Request#4: Street-facing windows that span the 9'-12' zone Exhibit Neighborhood ' i I i z �, �y�M � M.#rte/• .i;: `y. rr M i + "1� r ` i or T W■► Ar 1 F:. -` i� +tr ' ' _.' ri: -J-�rre�p� p r•�KA RC'?W. - � A j Vv �, ___ 'iii► t i 91 Exhibit D Review Criteria 26.410.020.D Variances 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 Staff Response: The Applicant is requesting variances from four separate Residential Design Standards of the Code. This criterion is applied to each standard below. 1. The first variance request is from the standard on building orientation,found in Section 26.410.040.A.1 of the Code, which states "The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street facing facades must be parallel to the intersection streets. On curvilinear streets, the front faivade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street." The Applicant has oriented the building as if this were a lot on a curvilinear street instead of a corner lot. The front facade of homes in this neighborhood tend to be oriented in the direction of the access point to each lot. Access to this property has been located on Mountain View Drive. This is a corner lot that dos have some relationship to both streets. However, in keeping with the neighborhood context, Staff finds this criterion to not be met. 2. Section 26.410.040.D.3.c states "On lots at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport may be forward of the front facade of the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side- loaded)." The subject lot is greater than 15,000 sq.ft., permitting the garage to be in front of the house, as proposed. The garage doors would clearly meet the Code were the site curvilinear rather than a corner lot. However, since the lot has been determined by Staff to be a corner lot, the expectation is that the garage doors will be perpendicular to Mountain View Drive. This is a condition related to building 1 orientation, above, but not found in any other area of the neighborhood. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. 3. Section 26.040.410.D.I.a states "The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building." The Applicant has proposed a design where the entry door is located approximately 30' from the front-most wall of the building. Although the door is set back approximately 30' on the proposed residence the design is such that the front door is highly visible and easy to find. However, this is an unusual design for the neighborhood and does not quite meet the guidelines for following neighborhood context. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. 4. Section 26.040.410.D.3.a states "Street facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet (12) above the finished first floor." The Applicant has proposed four street facing windows that span the 9'-12'zone. One of these windows is a transom above the front door, and is exempt from this standard. The remaining three windows are in line with the transom, with one to the left and two to the right of the transom. These windows measure approximately 1' in height and begin at 9' on the building as measured from the finished first floor. The purpose of this particular standard is to clearly delineate first and second stories of a building. The separation provides relief between stories and reduces the appearance of the building's massing. The windows are located on either side of the transom above the front door (a permitted feature). Furthermore these windows are located on a one-story feature of the proposed residence. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Response: The subject parcel is a 15,028 sq.ft. lot, with a wider front yard and a narrower rear yard. Staff does acknowledge the slimming of the property as it is traveled from the front to the rear. However, the site is larger than the typical west end lot, without significant grade changes across the parcel that would require the reduction of floor area. Staff does not believe the shape of the lot to be a significant detriment to the development, requiring variances from any of the four standards in order to achieve development, particularly since the existing residence will be fully demolished. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. (Ord. No. 52-2003, § 5; Ord. No. 20-2005, § 1) 2 26.410.040. Residential design standards. A. Site design. The intent of these design standards is to encourage residential buildings that address the street in a manner which creates a consistent "facade line" and defines the public and semi-public realms. In addition, where fences or dense landscaping exist or are proposed, it is intended that they be used to define the boundaries of private property without eliminating the visibility of the house and front yard from the street. 1. Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street-facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.13.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. One (1) element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. Staff Response: This lot is situated on two streets—Mountain View Dr. and North Rd. The Applicant has oriented the proposed home design to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street, which would be the correct way to orient a building on a curvilinear street. However, Staff has determined these streets form a corner, requiring the street- facing facades of the structures to be parallel to the intersecting streets. The Applicant is requesting a variance from this standard. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. 2. Build-to lines. On parcels or lots of less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, at least sixty percent (60%) of the front facade shall be within five (5) feet of the minimum front yard setback line. On corner sites, this standard shall be met on the frontage with the longest block length. Porches may be used to meet the sixty percent (60%) standard. Staff Response: The subject parcel is larger than 15,000 sq.ft. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 3. Fences. Fences, hedgerows and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two (42) inches high, measured from natural grade, in all areas forward of the front facade of the house. Man-made berms are prohibited in the front yard setback. Staff Response: The Applicant is not proposing any fences, hedgerows or planters at this time. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. B. Building form. The intent of the following building form standards is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes which are more similar in their massing, by promoting the development of accessory units off of the City alleys and by preserving solar access. 1. Secondary mass. All new single-family and duplex structures shall locate at least ten percent (10%) of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate linking element. This standard shall only apply to parcels within the Aspen infill area pursuant to Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. 3 A subordinate linking element for the purposes of'linking a primary and secondary mass shall be at least ten (10) feet in length, not more than ten (10) feet in width, and with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Accessible outdoor space over the linking element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an accessible outdoor space over a linking element must be the minimum reasonably necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must be 50% or more transparent. Staff Response: The subject property is outside of the Aspen Infill area, and therefore not subject to this standard as per 26.410.010.B.3 of the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. C. Parking, garages and carports. The intent of the following parking, garages and carport standards is to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing parking, garages and carports on alleys or to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist. 1. For all residential uses that have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall apply: a) Parking, garages and carports shall be accessed from an alley or private road. b) If the garage doors are visible from a street or alley, then they shall be single-stall doors or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. c) If the garage doors are not visible from a street or alley, the garage doors may be either single-stall or normal double-stall garage ciW=?r:�;. Staff Response: This property is accessed from Mountain View Drive, which is a public street. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 2. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the following standards shall be apply: a) On the street facing facade(s), the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the width of the garage or carport. Staff Response: On the facade facing Mountain View Drive, the width of the first floor living area measures 56', while the garage measures 34 . Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) The front facade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house. Staff Response: The subject lot is greater than 15,000 sq. ft. and so the Applicant has chosen to respond to criterion c, following. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. c) On lots of at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport may be forward of the front facade of the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side-loaded). 4 Staff Response: The subject parcel measures 15,029 sq.ft. in size, therefore the garage is permitted to be forward of the building's front facade, as represented. However, due to the previously discussed orientation issue, the garage doors are side-loaded from the perspective of the house, but are not perpendicular to the street. The Applicant is seeking a variance from this standard. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. d) When the floor of a garage or carport is above or below the street level, the driveway cut within the front yard setback shall not exceed two (2) feet in depth, measured from natural grade. Staff Response: The floor of the proposed garage is not below the street level. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable.- - - - - - - - - - - - - e) The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not be greater than twenty- four (24) feet. Staff Response: The vehicular entrance of the proposed garage measures 18' in width. Staff finds this criterion to be met. f) If the garage doors are visible from a public street or alley, then they shall be single- stall doors or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. Staff Response: The garage doors are not entirely perpendicular to Mountain View Drive, and are therefore visible from this public street. The doors have been designed to appear as single-stall doors. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Building elements. The intent of the following building element standards is to ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience and reinforce local building traditions. 1. Street oriented entrance and principal window. All single-family homes and duplexes, except as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.13.4 shall have a street-oriented entrance and a street facing principal window. Multi-family units shall have at least one (1) street- oriented entrance for every four (4) units and front units must have a street facing a principal window. Staff Response: The proposed design includes a street-oriented entrance and multiple street facing principal windows. Staff finds this criterion to be met. On corner lots,entries and principal windows should face whichever street has a greater block length. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are met: a) The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight (8) feet. Staff Response: The entry door faces Mountain View Drive, and measures eight feet in height. However, the door is set back approximately 31'from the front-most wall of the building. The Applicant is requesting a variance from this standard. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. 5 b) A covered entry porch of fifty (50) or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six (6) feet, shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one (1) story in height. Staff Response: The design has been proposed with a covered entry porch measuring 104 sq.ft., a depth of 6'9 and is part of the front facade. The entry porch is no more than one story in height. Staff finds this request to be met. c) A street-facing principal window requires that a significant window or group of windows face street. Staff Response: The home has been designed with a significant window to the right of the front door. There are many other street facing windows on the proposed building's front faVade. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. First story element. All residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) 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. Staff Response: The first story element in the proposed design is the easternmost structure of the building. This part of the residence is one story of living space, does not exceed 10' as measured to the plate height, and has no accessible space over it. The depth of this feature measures approximately 21', is street facing, and exceeds 20% of the building's overall width. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Windows. a) Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet (12) above the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. A transom window above the main entry is exempt from this standard. Staff Response: The Applicant has proposed four street facing windows that span the 9'- 12'zone. One of these windows is a transom above the front door, and is exempt from this standard. The remaining three windows are in line with the transom, with one to the left and two to the right of the transom. These windows measure approximately P in height and begin at a height of 9 . The Applicant is requesting a variance from this standard to permit these windows to remain in this area. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. b) No more than one (1) nonorthogonal window shall be allowed on each facade of the building. A single nonorthogonal window in a gable end may be divided with 6 4. Lightwells. All areaways, lightwells and/or stairwells on the street-facing facade(s) of a building shall be entirely recessed behind the front-most wall of the building. Staff Response:All proposed lightwells are entirely recessed behind the front-most wall of the building. No areaways or stairwells have been proposed with this application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. Context. The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures. 1. Materials. The following standards must be met: a) The quality of the exterior materials and details and their application shall be consistent on all sides of the building. Staff Response: The materials proposed for this residence are wood and stone. They appear appropriate to meet this condition, and are used consistently on all sides of the building. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) Materials shall be used in ways that are true to their characteristics. For instance stucco, which is a light or nonbearing material, shall not be used below a heavy material, such as stone. Staff Response: The Applicant has not proposed any materials that will be used in ways that are untrue to their characteristics. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c) Highly reflective surfaces shall not be used as exterior materials. Staff Response: No highly reflective exterior materials are proposed with this application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Inflection. The following standard must be met for parcels which are six thousand (6,000) square feet or over and as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.13.2: a) If a one-story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one-story in height along their common lot line. If there are one-story buildings on both sides of the subject site, the Applicant may choose the side toward which to inflect. Staff Response: The subject property is outside of the Aspen Infill area, and therefore not subject to this standard as per 26.410.010.B.3 of the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. (Ord. No. 52-2003, §§6-8; Ord. No. 20-2005, §1; Ord. No. 27-2010, §3) 7 t CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY G l r 1-11 A0 N PLANNER: Sara Nadolny—970.429.2739 DATE: 8.30.13 UPDATED 12.10.2013 PROJECT: 1330/1340 Mountain View Dr. - Subdivision Amendment REPRESENTATIVE: Ali Gidfar—ali @workshop8.us TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision, Other Amendment DESCRIPTION: The applicant, owner of 1330 Mountain View Dr. is interested in pursuing a lot line adjustment with the neighboring property, 1340 Mountain View Dr., which will result in 742 sq. ft. of land being exchanged between the two properties. Each property will maintain the same amount of square footage as currently exists. The property exchange is proposed to occur along the lot line between the two subject parcels. The subject properties are currently owned by family members. The purpose to this exchange is to allow the owners of 1330 to benefit from a wider northern property line that is intended to be preserved for views, while 1340 will benefit from a greater presence and exposure to Mountain View Dr. These parcels are part of the West Meadow Subdivision, which has a Homeowner's Association. 1330 is Lot 5 of this subdivision, and 1340 is lot 4 of this subdivision. The applicant will be required to provide a letter of approval from the HOA for this project as part of the application. The West Meadow Subdivision was approved in 1958, with the final plat recorded at Reception No. 106400, Book 2, Pg 245. The applicant is also interested in pursuing two Residential Design Standards Variances, based on the outcome of the lot line adjustment request. The applicant intends on demolishing the current residence and replacing it with a new single family home. The applicant is requesting variances from the following standards: • 26.410.040.D.1.a —"The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building..."and • 26.410.040.D.3.a — "Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve(12)feet above the finished first floor..." A third variance may be sought regarding the size of the first story element. The subject parcel is located in the R-15 zone district, and is outside of the Aspen Infill Area, and therefore not required to meet the Residential Design Standards related to secondary mass, non-orthogonal windows, and inflection. All other standards shall apply. This application involves a two-step process. The lot line adjustment is a land use case that will be reviewed administratively, while the Residential Design Standards application will be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission during a duly noticed public hearing. Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience. Land Use Application Form: Land Use application Land Use Code: Land Use Code Applicable Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.480.030.1 Lot line adjustment 26.410.13 Residential Design Standards—Variances 26.410.040.D.1.a Street oriented entrance and principal window 26.410.040.D.3.a Windows 1 Review by: - Planning Staff for compliance/completeness - Planning Staff for Lot Line Adjustment - P&Z for Residential Design Standard Variances Public Hearing: Required —P&Z Planning Fees: $4550 Deposit, which breaks down into the following: - $1,300 for 4 hours of staff time—Lot Line Adjustment. - $3,250 for 10 hours of staff time—RDS Variance *Additional staff time required will be billed at a rate of$325/hour Referral Fees: No referrals are anticipated at this time Total Deposit: $ 4550 Total Number of Application Copies: Ten (10) for P&Z To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's names, addresses and telephone numbers, contained within a letter signed by each applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on their behalf. 3. Street addresses and legal descriptions of the parcels on which the land exchange is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. Completed Land Use Application. 5. Signed fee agreement. 6. Pre-application Conference Summary. 7. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 8. Proof of ownership. 9. Letter of consent from the Homeowner's Association. 9. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 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. Agreement to Pay Application Fees agreement between the City of Aspen("City")and `* Prop"'.. Tallman Joseph P Legacy Trust Phone No.: 303.909.0126 Owner("I"); " Email: JLST29comcast.net Address of 1330 Mountain View Dr Billing 380 Inca Pkwy Property: Address: Boulder CO 80303 (subject of (send bills here) application) I understand that the City has adopted,via Ordinance No. ,Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $ flat fee for $ flat fee for, $ flat fee for $ flat fee for For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration,unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood,and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment. 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 an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ 4,550 deposit for 14 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at$315 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time.Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at$265 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: Chris Bendon d- C Community Development Director Name: T 71PCLLMAN City Use: Title: Fees Due:; Received:; ATTACHMENT 2—LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: Private Single Family Residence Location: 1330 Mountain View Drive (Lot 5, West Meadow Subdivision, Block 1) Indicate street address,lot&block number,legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID#(REQUIRED) 273501308006 APPLICANT: Name: Joseph Tallman Address: 380 Inca Pkwy, Boulder CO 80303 Phone#: 303.909.0126 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Ali Gidfar Address: 4383 Apple Ct, Boulder CO 80301 Phone#: 303.669.3370 TYPE OF APPLICATION:(please check all that apply): ❑ GMQS Exemption ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Temporary Use ❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final PUD(&PUD Amendment) ❑ Text/Map Amendment ❑ Special Review ❑ Subdivision ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ ESA—8040 Greenline,Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption(includes ❑ Final SPA(&SPA Margin,Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Amendment) Mountain View Plane ❑ Commercial Design Review ❑ Lot Split ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion ® Residential Design Variance ® Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Other: ❑ Conditional Use EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings,uses,previous approvals,etc. 1838sf ranch-style single family residence with 575sf attached garage and 792sf wood deck; house has 3 bedrooms and 3 baths. PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings,uses,modifications,etc. two-story single family residence with basement and attached garage; 1st floor= 2616sf, 2nd floor= 1563sf, garage = 536sf Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ ❑ Pre-Application Conference Summary ❑ Attachment#1,Signed Fee Agreement ❑ Response to Attachment#3,Dimensional Requirements Form ❑ Response to Attachment#4,Submittal Requirements-Including Written Responses to Review Standards ❑ 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5"X 11"must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format)must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-1)model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: Single Family Residence Applicant: Ali Gidfar for Joseph Tallman Location: 1330 Mountain View Dr Zone District: - Lot Size: 15,028sf Lot Area: 15,028sf (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area,Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements,and steep slopes.Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: 0 Proposed: 0 Number of residential units: Existing: 1 Proposed: 1 Number of bedrooms: Existing: 3 Proposed.• 6 Proposed% of demolition(Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: 2,038sf Allowable: 4,502sf Proposed: 4,501 sf Principal bldg. height: Existing: +l- 14' Allowable: 251-0" Proposed: 24'-11" Access. bldg. height: Existing: - Allowable: - Proposed: - On-Site parking: Existing: - Required: - Proposed: % Site coverage: Existing: 21.3% Required: no req. Proposed: 23.9% % Open Space: Existing: - Required: no req. Proposed: - Front Setback: Existing: 40'-4" Required: 25'-0" Proposed: 25'-1/2" Rear Setback: Existing: 93'-1 Required: 10'-0" Proposed.. 74'-2 1/2" Combined F/R: Existing: 133-5" Required: 35'-0" Proposed: 99141 Side Setback: Existing:1 1`9 1/2" Required.• 10'-0" Proposed: 10'-1/2" Side Setback: Existing:5'-10 1/2"Required: 10'-0" Proposed: 10'-1/2" Combined Sides: Existing: 17'-8" Required: 20'-0" Proposed: 20'-1" Distance Between Existing - Required: - Proposed: - Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: COMMITMENT for TITLE INSURANCE issued by TITLE COMPANY of the roc!<i-3s as agent for WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Reference: Commitment Number: 0704189-C Commitment Ordered By Inquiries should be directed to: Susan Hass Dwayne Romero Title Company of the Rockies 1340 Mountain View Drive 132 W.Main Street,Suite B Aspen,CO 81611 Aspen,CO 81611 Phone: (970)920-9299 Fax: (970)920-5352 email: shass @titlecorockies.com Reference Property Address: 1330 Mountain View Drive,Aspen,CO 81611 SCHEDULE A 1. EffectiveDate: December 20,2013,7:00 am Issue Date: January 13,2014 2. Policy(or Policies)to be issued: ALTA Owner's Policy(6-17-06) Policy Amount: Amount to be Determined Premium: Amount to be Determined Proposed Insured: A Buyer To Be Determined 3. The estate or interest in the Land described or referred to in this Commitment is: Fee Simple and Title to said estate or interest is at the Effective Date vested in: Joseph P.Tallman Legacy Trust 4. The Land referred to in this Commitment is located in the County of Pitkin,State of Colorado,and is described as follows: Lot 5, Block 1, WEST MEADOW SUBDIVISION,according to the Plat thereof filed June 9,1958,in Ditch Book 2A at Page 245. Alta Commitment-2006 Schedule A Commitment No.0704189-C Schedule B-I Requirements C0NDMMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B-.SECTION I REQUIREMENTS THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE COMPLIED WITH: Item(a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item(b) Proper instrument(s)creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record,to wit: 1. Release by the Public Trustee of Pitkin County of the Deed of Trust from The Steinhurst Colorado Trust UAD September 22,2004 for the use of Karen Steinhurst Life Insurance Trust U/A DID 08/21/1996,to secure$957,591.00,dated December 20,2007,and recorded December 20,2007,at Reception No. 545088. 2. Deed from Joseph P.Tallman Legacy Trust to A Buyer To Be Determined. NOTE: Duly executed real property transfer declaration,executed by either the Grantor or Grantee,to accompany the Deed mentioned above,pursuant to Article 14 of House Bill No. 1288- CRA 39-14-102. NOTE: Statement of authority for Joseph P.Tallman Legacy Trust,a Colorado trust,recorded May 24,2013,discloses that the names and addresses of the trustee(s)authorized to act on behalf of the trust are as follows: Joseph P.Tallman and Elizabeth M. Snowden. 3. Evidence satisfactory to the Company or its duly authorized agent either(a)that the"real estate transfer taxes"imposed by Ordinance No.20(Series of 1979),and by Ordinance No. 13,(Series of 1990),of the City of Aspen,Colorado have been paid,and that the liens imposed thereby have been fully satisfied,or(b)that Certificates of Exemption have been issued pursuant to the provisions thereof. THE COMPANY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT AN ADDITIONAL SEARCH OF THE RECORDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER FOR PITKIN COUNTY,COLORADO FOR JUDGMENT LIENS,TAX LIENS OR OTHER SIMILAR OR DISSIMILAR INVOLUNTARY MATTERS AFFECTING THE GRANTEE OR GRANTEES, AND TO MAKE SUCH ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AS IT DEEMS NECESSARY, AFTER THE IDENTITY OF THE GRANTEE OR GRANTEES HAS BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE COMPANY. NOTE:THIS COMMITMENT IS ISSUED UPON THE EXPRESS AGREEMENT AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICABLE PREMIUMS,CHARGES AND FEES SHALL BE PAID BY THE APPLICANT IF THE APPLICANT AND/OR ITS DESIGNEE OR NOMINEE CLOSES THE TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED BY OR OTHERWISE RELIES UPON THE COMMITMENT,ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES AND SCHEDULES OF RATES ON FILE WITH THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE. Alta Commitment-2006 Schedule B-1 Requirements Commitment No.0704189-C Schedule B-I1 Exceptions COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B-SECTION II EXCEPTIONS Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. Any loss or damage,including attorney fees,by reason of the matters shown below: 1. Any facts,rights,interests,or claims which are not shown by the Public Records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2. Easements or claims of easements,not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment,encumbrance,violation,variation,or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land. 4. Any lien,or right to a lien for services,labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished,imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. S. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims or other matters,if any created,first appearing in the Public Records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof,but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. (a)Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records;(b)proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments,or notices of such proceedings,whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7. Right of the Proprietor of a Vein or Lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom,should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted,as reserved in United States Patent recorded August 17, 1889 in Book 55 at Page 5. 8. Restrictions,which do not contain a forfeiture or reverter clause,as contained in instrument recorded September 29, 1958,in Book 185 at Page 211, as amended by instrument recorded April zt, 1959,in Book 187 at Page 183,October 5,1979 in Book 377 at Page 227,August 18, 1994,in Book 758 at Page 850,November 11,2005,at Reception No. 517375 and October 17,2008,at Reception No. 553656. 9. Easements,rights of way and all other matters as shown on the Plat of said subdivision filed June 9, 1958 in Ditch Book 2A at Page 245. 10. All right,title,claim,demand or interest which may be asserted by the owners of adjoining property in and to subject property or by the owners of subject property in and to adjacent property,based on adverse possession or otherwise,due to or resulting from the failure of the fences located on subject property and adjacent property to follow established boundary lines,as evidenced by Warranty Deed recorded May 24,2013,at Reception No. 599814. Alta Commitment-2006 Schedule B-11 Exceptions Commitment No.0704189-C Disclosure Statements DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note 1: Colorado Division of Insurance Note 5: Pursuant to C.R.S. §10-11-123 Note 10: Pursuant to Regulation 3-5-1 Regulations 3-5-1,Paragraph C of Article VII, Notice is hereby given: Section 9(G)notice is hereby given that requiresthat (a)If there is recorded evidence that a mineral "Until a title entity receives written "Every Title entity shall be responsible for estate has been severed,leased or otherwise instructions pertaining to the holding of all matters which appear of record prior to the conveyed from the surface estate then there fiduciary funds,in a form agreeable to the title time of recording whenever the Title entity is a substantial likelihood that a third party entity,it shall comply with the following: conducts the closing and is responsible for holds some or all interest in oil,gas,other 1.The title entity shall deposit funds into an recording or filing of legal documents minerals, or geothermal energy in the escrow, trust, or other fiduciary account resulting from the transaction which was property,and and hold them in a fiduciary capacity. closed."(Gap Protection) (b)That such mineral estate may include the 2. The:title entity shall,use any funds right to enter and use the property without designated as "earnest money" for the the surface owner's permission. consummation of the transaction as Note 2: Exception No. 4 of Schedule B, evidenced by the contract to buy and sell Section 2 of this Commitment may be deleted Note 6: Effective September 1, 1997,C.R.S. real estate applicable to said transaction, from the Owner's Policy to be issued §30-10-406 requires that all documents except as otherwise provided in this hereunder upon compliance with the received for recording or filing in the clerk section. If the transaction does not close, following conditions: and recorder's office shall contain a top the title entity shall: A.The Land described in Schedule A of this margin of at least one inch and a left, right a. Release the earnest money funds as commitment must be a single-family and bottom margin of at least one-half inch directed by written instructions signed residence, which includes a condominium the clerk and recorder may refuse to record or by both the buyer and seller;or or townhouse unit. file any document that does not conform. b.If acceptable written instructions are not B. No labor or materials may have been received, uncontested funds shall be furnished by mechanics or materialmen for Note7: Our Privacy Policy: held by the title entity for 180 days from purpose of construction on the Land We will not reveal nonpublic personal the scheduled date of closing, after described in Schedule A of this customer information to any external non- which the title entity shall return said Commitment within the past,13 months. affiliated organization unless we have been funds to the payor. C.The Company must receive an appropriate authorized by the customer,or are required by 3. In the event of any controversy regarding affidavit indemnifying the Company law, the funds held by the title entity against unfiled mechanic's and (notwithstanding any termination of the materialmen'sliens. Note& Records: contract), the title entity shall not be D.Any deviation from conditions A though C Regulation 3-5-1 Section 7(1)provides that required to take any action unless and until above is subject to such additional each title entity shall maintain adequate such controversy is resolved.At its option requirements or Information as the documentation and records sufficient to show and discretion,the title entity may: Company may deem necessary, or, at its compliance with this regulation and Title 10 a.Await any proceeding;or option, the Company may refuse to delete of the Colorado Revised Statutes for a period b. Interplead all parties and deposit such the exception. of not less than seven (7) years, except as funds into a court of competent E.Payment of the premium for said coverage, otherwise permitted by law. jurisdiction,and recover court costs and reasonable attorney and legal fees;or Note 9:Pursuant Regulation 3-5-1 Section 9 c. Deliver written notice to the buyer and Note 3: The following disclosures are hereby (F)notice is hereby given that seller that unless the title entity receives made pursuant to§10-11-122,C.R.S.: "A title entity shall not earn interest on a copy of a summons and complaint or (i)The subject real property may be located in fiduciary funds unless disclosure is made to claim (between buyer and seller), a special taxing district; all necessary parties to a transaction that containing the case number of the (ii) A certificate of taxes due listing each interest is or has been earned. Said disclosure lawsuit or lawsuits,within 120 days of taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from must offer the opportunity to receive payment the title entity's written notice delivered the County Treasurer or the County of any interest earned on such funds beyond to the parties,title entity shall return the Treasurer's authorized agent;and any administrative fees as may be on file with funds to the depositing party." (iii) Information regarding special districts the division. Said disclosure must be clear and the boundaries of such districts may be and conspicuous, and may be made at any obtained from the County Commissioners, time up to and including closing." the County Clerk and Recorder,, or the Be advised that the closing agent will or County Assessor. could charge an Administrative Fee for processing such an additional services request Note 4: If the sales price of the subject and any resulting payee will also be subjected property exceeds$100,000.00,the seller shall to a W-9 or other required tax documentation be required to comply with the disclosure or for suchpurpose(s). withholding provisions of C.R.S. §39-22- Be further advised that, for many 604.5(Non-resident withholding). transactions,the imposed Administrative Fee associated with such an additional service may exceed any such interest earned. Therefore,you may have the right to some of the interest earned over and above the Administrative Fee, if applicable (e.g., any money over any administrative fees involved in figuring the amounts earned). Disclosure Statements Anti-Fraud Statement NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete,or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines,denial of insurance and civil damages.Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete,or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado division of insurance within the department of regulatory agencies. This anti-fraud statement is affixed to and made a part of this policy. Joseph PTallman 38U Inca Parkway Boulder, C08O303 (303) 909-0126 December 2O. 20!3 To whom it may concern: I recognize Ali Gidfar as my representative authorized to act on my behalf in the matter of the lot line adjustment between rny property at 1330 Mountain View Drive, and the adjacent pn}pe/1yat134OKJnun|am View Drive, Aspen Colorado. Ali Gidfar as my architect is authorized to represent me in all proceedings related to the Land Use Application process. His address is: 4383 Apple Court, Boulder, C{) 80381 SinoerS|y, o e&pR man —~ Joseph PlaNmGn 38O Inca Parkway Boulder, C[) 8O303 (303) 909-0126 December 2O. 2013 Tb whom it may concern: I recognize Ali Gidfar as my tepresent;ative authorized to act on nly behalf in the matter of the lot line adjustment between my property at 1330 Mountain View Drive, and the adjacent property 3t134O Mountain View Drive, Aspen Colorado. Ali Gidfaraanny architect is authorized to represent me in all proceedings related io the Land Use Application process. His address i5: 4383 Apple Court, Boulder, CO8O301 Sincerely, Tallman --~ (Zio COMMITMENT for TITLE INSURANCE issued by TITLE COMPANY Iof the rockies as agent for WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Reference: Commitment Number: 0704188-C Commitment Ordered By: Inquiries should be directed to: Susan Hass Dwayne Romero Title Company of the Rockies 1340 Mountain View Drive 132 W.Main Street,Suite B Aspen,CO 81611 Aspen,CO 81611 Phone: (970)920-9299 Fax:(970)920-5352 email: shass @titlecorockies.com Reference Property Address:. 1340 Mountain View Drive,Aspen,CO 81611 SCHEDULE A 1. EffectiveDate: December 20,2013,7:00 am Issue Date: January 13,2014 2. Policy(or Policies)to be issued: ALTA Owner's Policy(6-17-06) Policy Amount: Amount to be Determined Premium: Amount to be Determined Proposed Insured: A Buyer To Be Determined 3. The estate or interest in the Land described or referred to in this Commitment is: Fee Simple and Title to said estate or interest is at the Effective Date vested in: Dwayne Romero and Margaret T.Romero,in joint tenancy 4. The Land referred to in this Commitment is located in the County of Pitkin,State of Colorado,and is described as.follows: Lot 4, Block 1, WEST MEADOW SUBDIVISION,according to the Plat thereof filed June 9,1958,in Ditch Book 2A at Page 245. Alta Commitment-2006 Schedule A Commitment No.0704188-C Schedule B-I Requirements COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B-SECTION I REQUIREMENTS THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE COMPLIED WITH: Item(a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item(b) Proper instrument(s)creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record,to wit: 1. Release by the Public Trustee of Pitkin County of the Deed of Trust from Dwayne Romero and Margaret T.Romero for the use of ING Bank,FSB,to secure$2,300,000.00,dated March 10,2008, and recorded March 14,2008,at Reception No. 547390. 2. Release by the Public Trustee of Pitkin County of the Deed of Trust from Dwayne Romero and Margaret T.Romero for the use of U.S.Bank National Association N.D.,to secure$325,000.00, dated August 23,2010,and recorded September 15,2010,at Reception No. 573578. NOTE: Subordination Agreement recorded January 2,2013,at Reception No. 595720. 3. Release by the Public Trustee of Pitkin County of the Deed of Trust from Dwayne L.Romero and Margaret T.Romero for the use of Bank of America,N.A.,to secure$1,970,000.00,dated December 24,2012,and recorded January 2,2013,at Reception No. 595707. 4. Deed from Dwayne Romero and Margaret T.Romero,in joint tenancy to A Buyer To Be Determined. NOTE: Duly executed real property transfer declaration,executed by either the Grantor or Grantee,to accompany the Deed mentioned above,pursuant to Article 14 of House Bill No. 1288- CRA 39-14-102. 5. Evidence satisfactory to the Company or its duly authorized agent either(a)that the"real estate transfer taxes"imposed by Ordinance No.20(Series of 1979),and by Ordinance No. 13,(Series of 1990),of the City of Aspen,Colorado have been paid,and that the liens imposed thereby have been fully satisfied,or(b)that Certificates of Exemption have been issued pursuant to the provisions thereof. THE COMPANY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT AN ADDITIONAL SEARCH OF THE RECORDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER FOR PITKIN COUNTY,COLORADO FOR JUDGMENT LIENS,TAX LIENS OR OTHER SIMILAR OR DISSIMILAR INVOLUNTARY MATTERS AFFECTING THE GRANTEE OR GRANTEES, AND TO MAKE SUCH ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AS IT DEEMS NECESSARY, AFTER THE IDENTITY OF THE GRANTEE OR GRANTEES HAS BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE COMPANY. NOTE:THIS COMMITMENT IS ISSUED UPON THE EXPRESS AGREEMENT AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICABLE PREMIUMS,CHARGES AND FEES SHALL BE PAID BY THE APPLICANT IF THE APPLICANT AND/OR ITS DESIGNEE OR NOMINEE CLOSES THE TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED BY OR OTHERWISE RELIES UPON THE COMMITMENT,ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES AND SCHEDULES OF RATES ON FILE WITH THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF Alta Commitment-2006 Schedule B-I Requirements Commitment No.0704188-C Schedule B-I Requirements(continued) INSURANCE. Alta Commitment-2006 Schedule B-I Requirements(continued) Commitment No.0704188-C Schedule B-II Exceptions COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE .SCHEDULE B-SECTION II ExCEPTIONS Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. Any loss or damage,including attorney fees,by reason of the matters shown below: 1. Any facts,rights,interests,or claims which are not shown by the Public Records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2. Easements or claims of easements,not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment,encumbrance,violation,variation,or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land. 4. Any lien,or right to a lien for services,labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished,imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5. Defects,liens,encumbrances,adverse claims or other matters,if any created,first appearing in the Public Records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof,but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. (a)Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records;(b)proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments,or notices of such proceedings,whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7. Right of the Proprietor of a Vein or Lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom,should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted,as reserved in United States Patent recorded August 17, 1889 in Book 55 at Page 5. 8. Restrictions,which do not contain a forfeiture or reverter clause,as contained in instrument recorded September 29, 1958,in Book 185 at Page 211, as amended by instrument recorded April 4, 1959,in Book 187 at Page 183,October 5,1979 in Book 377 at Page 227,August 18, 1994,in Book 758 at Page 850,November 11,2005,at Reception No. 517375 and October 17,2008,at Reception No. 553656. 9. Easements,rights of way and all other matters as shown on the Plat of said subdivision filed June 9, 1958 in Ditch Book 2A at Page 245. 10. All matters disclosed on the Survey by River City Surveys,LLC,Job No.5171,dated February 23, 2006 and filed February 28,2006,in Plat Book 77 at Page 80. Alta Commitment-2006 Schedule B-H Exceptions Commitment No.0704188-C Disclosure Statements DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note 1: Colorado Division of Insurance Note 5: Pursuant to C.R.S. §10-11-123 Note 10: Pursuant to Regulation- 3-5-1 Regulations 3-5-1,Paragraph C of Article VII, Notice is hereby given: Section 9(G)notice is hereby given that requiresthat (a)If there is recorded evidence that a mineral "Until a title entity receives written "Every Title entity shall be responsible for estate has been severed,leased or otherwise instructions pertaining to the holding of all matters which appear of record prior to the conveyed from the surface estate then there fiduciary funds,in a form agreeable to the title time of recording whenever the Title entity is a substantial likelihood that a third party entity,it shall comply with the following: conducts the closing and is responsible for holds some or all interest in oil,gas,other 1. The title entity shall deposit funds into an recording or filing of legal documents minerals, or geothermal energy in the escrow, trust, or other fiduciary account resulting from the transaction which was property,and and hold them in a fiduciary capacity. closed."(Gap Protection) (b)That such mineral estate may include the 2. The title entity shall use any funds right to enter and use the property without designated as "earnest money". the the surface owner's permission. consummation of the transaction as Note 2: Exception No. 4 of Schedule B, t evidenced by the contract to buy and sell Section 2 of this Commitment may be deleted Note 6: Effective September 1, 1997,C.R.S. real estate applicable to said transaction, from the Owner's Policy to be issued §30-10-406 requires that all documents except as otherwise provided in this hereunder upon compliance with the received for recording or filing in the clerk section. If the transaction does not close, following conditions: and recorder's office shall contain a top the title entity shall: A.The Land described in Schedule A of this margin of at least one inch and a left, right a. Release the earnest money funds as commitment must be a single-family and bottom margin of at least one-half inch directed by written instructions signed residence, which includes a condominium the clerk and recorder may refuse to record or by both the buyer and seller;or or townhouse unit. file any document that does not conform. b.If acceptable written instructions are not B. No labor or materials may have been received, uncontested funds shall be furnished by mechanics or materialmen for Note7: Our Privacy Policy: held by the title entity for 180 days from purpose of construction on the Land We will not reveal nonpublic personal the scheduled date of closing, after described in Schedule A of this customer information to any external non- which the title entity shall return said Commitment within the past 13 months. affiliated organization unless we have been funds to the payor. C.The Company must receive an appropriate authorized by the customer,or are required by 3. In the event of any controversy regarding affidavit indemnifying the Company law. the funds held by the title entity against unftled mechanic's and (nohvithstanding any termination of the materialmen'sliens. Note8: Records: contract), the title entity shall not be D.Any deviation from conditions A though C Regulation 3-5-1 Section 7(l)provides that required to take any action unless and until above is subject to such additional each title entity shall maintain adequate such controversy is resolved.At its option requirements or Information as the documentation and records sufficient to show and discretion,the title entity may: Company may deem necessary, or, at its compliance with this regulation and Title 10 a.Await any proceeding;or option, the Company may refuse to delete of the Colorado Revised Statutes for a period b. Interplead all parties and deposit such the exception. of not less than seven (7) years, except as funds into a court of competent E.Payment of the premium for said coverage. otherwise permitted by law. jurisdiction,and recover court costs and reasonable attorney and legal fees;or Note 9: Pursuant Regulation 3-5-1 Section 9 c.Deliver written notice to the buyer and Note 3:The following disclosures are hereby (F)notice is hereby given that seller that unless the title entity receives made pursuant to§10-11-122,C.R.S.: "A title entity shall not ear interest on a copy of a summons and complaint or (i)The subject real property may be located in fiduciary funds unless disclosure is made to claim (between buyer and seller), a special taxing district; all necessary parties to a transaction that containing the case number of the (ii) A certificate of taxes due listing each interest is or has been earned. Said disclosure lawsuit or lawsuits,within 120 days of taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from must offer the opportunity to receive payment the title entity's written notice delivered the County Treasurer or the County of any interest earned on such funds beyond to the parties,title entity shall return the Treasurer's authorized agent;and any administrative fees as may be on file with funds to the depositing party." (iii) Information regarding special districts the division. Said disclosure must be clear and the boundaries of such districts may be and conspicuous, and may be made at any obtained from the County Commissioners, time up to and including closing." the County Clerk and Recorder, or the Be advised that the closing agent will or County Assessor. could charge an Administrative Fee for processing such an additional services request Note 4: If the sales price of the subject and any resulting payee will also be subjected property exceeds$100,000.00,the seller shall to a W-9 or other required tax documentation be required to comply with the disclosure or for suchpurpose(s). withholding provisions of C.R.S. §39-22- Be further advised that for many 604.5(Non-resident withholding). transactions,the imposed Administrative Fee associated with such an additional service may exceed any such interest earned. Therefore,you may have the right to some of the interest earned over and above the Administrative Fee, if applicable (e.g., any money over any administrative fees involved in figuring the amounts earned). Disclosure Statements Anti-Fraud Statement NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete,or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines,denial of insurance and civil damages.Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false,incomplete,or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado division of insurance within the department of regulatory agencies. This anti-fraud statement is affixed to and made a part of this policy. Dwayne Romero 1340 Mountain View Drive Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 544-9357 December 20, 2013 To whom it may concern: I recognize Ali Gidfar as my representative authorized to act on my behalf in the matter of the lot line adjustment between my property and the adjacent property at 1330 Mountain View Drive. His address is: 4383 Apple Court, Boulder, CO 80301 Sincerely, Dvtay�e Romero West Meadow Subdvision Homeowner's Association January 15, 2014 Michelle Frankel Studio 303, Inc. 3483 Apple Ct. Boulder, CO 80301 Dear Michelle: Thank you for submitting the (12.23.2013) Schematic plans on behalf of The Joseph P. Tallman Legacy Trust for the new residence proposed at 1330 Mountain View Drive. With the letter of commitment from the owner that an ADU will not be developed on the property and a cash in lieu payment will be negotiated, The Architectural Control Committee has approved your submission. Our approval is conditional to the cash in lieu payment vs. development of an ADU which is not allowed in our subdivision. Please provide an updated set of drawings upon receipt of your building permit in addition to copy of the construction management plan you issue for permit. Sincerely u ,li ple, , R.A. & Cathy Tierney Architectural Control Committee t West Meadow Subdivision Homeowner's Association cc: Raifie Bass, President Legend > City of Aspen 55.1 <41 Major Roads Roads in Rivers&Streams Ap Parcels Lakes&Ponds m STAGE R 0 ++l �kSOV To 44 01(1 0 z. A&30 h4OUWTAfN',.--lE:1bj w wwowffi*l� qe� , t, �kk prX ly?,A4 r 2z' q 0 MAROON CftEE*K RO 0. ;.k 14 0 SN. IV 4441,14 NOP , Sr 0 4 al- 0 47 0— r4? ,%�� K�.v %41'& .- Q0 pcdSr,"Ro 4� L Y*N.1 .4 LARI<SPUR LN FOCl4'RD Y %NfUSTV IEW()k Z �Je EASTtqc)OD 6R 4 L— City of Aspen Land Use Application for Residential Design Standards Variance Private Residence at 1330 Mountain View Drive Residential Design Standards compliance analysis 26.410.040 A. Site design 1. Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to The building facades are parallel to tangents along the the street. On corner lots, both street-facing facades must be streets. parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets,the front fagade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. One(1)element,such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. 2. Build-to lines On parcels or lots of less than fifteen thousand(15,000)square feet, Does Not Apply. Parcel is greater than 15,OOOsf. at least sixty percent(60%)of the front fagade shall be within five(5) feet of the minimum front yard setback line. On corner sites,this standard shall be met on the frontage with the longest block length. Porches may be used to meet the sixty percent(60%)standard. 3. Fences Fences,hedgerows and planter boxes shall not be more than No fences, hedgerows or planter boxes shall be more than forty-two(42)inches high,measured from natural grade, in all 42"high in any areas forward of the front fagade of the areas forward of the front fagade of the house. Man-made house. No man-made berms shall be created in the front berms are prohibited in the front yard setback. yard setback. B. Building 1. Secondary mass Parcel is exempt per 26.410.010.B.3 (parcel is not located form within the Aspen infill area). C. Parking, 1. For all residential uses that Does Not Apply. Parcel does not have access from alley or garages and have access from an alley or private road. carports private road,the following standards shall apply: 2. For all residential uses that a) On the street facing fagade(s),the width of the living area on On the street facing fagade,the width of the living area on have access only from a the first floor shall be at least five(5)feet greater than the width the first floor is--52'whereas the width of the garage is—34'. public street,the following of the garage or carport. standards shall apply: b) the front fagade of the garage or the front-most supporting The house conforms instead to 26.410.040.C.2c. column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10)feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house. c) On lots of at least fifteen thousand(15,000)square feet in Parcel is greater than 15,000sf. The garage is forward of the size,the garage or carport may be forward of the front fagade of front fagade of the house and its doors are perpendicular to the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are the tangent of the street. perpendicular to the street(side-loaded). d) When the floor of a garage or carport is above or below the The driveway cut within the front yard setback shall not street level,the driveway cut wihin the front yard setback shall exceed 2'in depth. not exceed two(2)feet in the depth, measured from natural grade. e) The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not Vehicular entrance width is 18'-0". be greater than twenty-four(24)feet. I i f) If the garage doors are visible from a public street or alley, The house shall have two single-stall garage doors. then they shall be single-stall doors or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. D. Building 1. Street oriented entrance& All single-family homes and duplexes,except as outlined in The entrance to the house is parallel to the street,directly elements principal window Subsection 26.410.010.8.4 shall have a street-oriented entrance visible and identifiable from the approach. and a street facing principal window. Multi-family units shall have The home has several significant street-facing windows. at least one(1)street-oriented entrance for every four(4)units and front units must have a street facing a principal window. On corner lots,entries and principal windows should face whichever street has a greater block length. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are met: a) The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten The entry door faces the street and is 33'back from the front- (10)feet back from the front-most wall of the building. Entry most wall of the building. The entry door is 8'tall. doors shall not be taller than eight(8)feet. b) A covered entry porch of fifty(50)or more square feet,with a The covered entry porch is 163sf, 6'deep,and 8'clear height minimum depth of six(6')feet,shall be part of the front facade. (1 story). Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one (1)story in height. c) A street-facing principal window requires that a significant IThe house has-212sf of glazing at the street-facing window or group of windows face street. entrance. 2. First story element. All residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing The porch is -30'wide,which is-41%of the width (-73')of element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent the house. The porch covering projects 6'. The porch does (20%)of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at not include interior living space and there is no accessible least six(6)feet from the wall the first story element is space above. The porch is 8'to the plate height. projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space,the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10)feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area)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. 3.Windows. a) Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where No street-facing windows span through the area where the a second floor level would typically exist,which is between nine second floor level exists,which is between 10'and 11'-4" (9)and twelve feet(12)above the finished first floor. For above the finished first floor. No windows span between 9' interior staircases,this measurement will be made from the first and 12'above the finished first floor except for the following: landing if one exists. A transom window above the main entry 1)The upstairs Master Bedroom has a fully-glazed door and is exempt from this standard. sidelight facing the street leading out to a deck. Since the finished floor at the upper level is 11'-4"above the finished floor of the ground floor,this glazing begins at 11'-4"above the finished first floor. However,this glazing is not visible from the street due to the height of the parapet around the deck. 2)At the entryway,glazing extends up to 10'-0"above the finished first floor,stopping below the underside of the upper floor. This includes a glazed transom above the front door, and glazing adjacent to the interior staircase. The first landing of this staircase is at-6'-6", and the glazing does not span between 9'and 12'above this landing. b) Parcel is exempt per 26.410.010.B.3 (parcel is not located within the Aspen infill area). 4. Lightwells. All areaways,lightwells and/or stairwells on the street-facing The building has two lightwells,one on the east side and one fagade(s)of a building shall be entirely recessed behind the on the west. Both are entirely recessed behind the front- front-most wall of the building. most wall of the building. E.Context 1.Materials a) The quality of the exterior materials and details and their High quality materials and details are designed for all sides application shall be consistent on all sides of the building. lof the buidling. b) Materials shall be used in ways that are true to their All exterior materials are to be used in appropriate manners. characteristics. For instance stucco,which is a light or nonbearing material,shall not be used below a heavy material, such as stone. c) Highly reflective surfaces shall not be used as exterior No highly reflective surfaces will be used for exterior materials. cladding. 2. Inflection. Parcel is exempt per 26.410.010.B.3 (parcel is not located within the Aspen infill area). City of Aspen Land Use Application for Residential Design Standards Variance Private Residence at 1330 Mountain View Drive Please see attached spreadsheet and drawings showing how our proposed building complies with the Residential Design Standards as stated in 26.410.040 of Title 26 Land Use Code. We seek variances for items 26.410.040.D.1.a and 26.410.040.D.3.a as follows: 26.410.040.D.1.a: "The entry door shall ... be no more than ten (10)feet back from the front-most wall of the building." We seek a variance to place the entry door at thirty three (33)feet back from the front-most wall of the building. The parti (the big idea, or planning principle) of this home is derived directly from the constraints of the site,which is long and narrow,wider toward the south and narrower toward the north. The proposed plan is composed of two ground floor wings that emulate open arms to receive guests and visitors alike.These wings are placed along the 10' setback lines along the property's east and west edges. The building's ground floor massing intentionally directs attention and access to the front door, which is parallel to the street, surrounded by glazing, and therefore prominently visible from Mountain View Drive. , Guests and visitors will be encouraged to approach the house, and upon entry find themselves in a double height space framing views of Red Mountain directly to the north. Programmatically, the front door is located to the greatest benefit of the home's occupants and guests by entering into the heart of the house with guest entertainment spaces to the east, casual gathering spaces to the west, and outdoor living spaces directly north of the entry foyer. The lot is compromised by its narrow width as well as its presence on a comer.The requested Lot Line Adjustment between 1330 (Lot 5)and 1340 (lot 4) Mountain View Drive will help to offset these shortcomings. Both property owners agree that this modification is equally beneficial to each of them.The lot line adjustment results in a wider backyard for 1330,while increasing the presence of 1340 on Mountain View Drive,while decreasing Lot 5's disproportionately long "shoreline"along Mountain View Drive. Lot 5 is very narrow, more so than other lots in the neighborhood. We studied plans to place the garage in the rear of the site, but came to realize that the driveway needed to access the garage would cover a significant portion of the site,with the garage itself occupying the most valuable section of the site at the expense of interior and exterior living spaces for the homeowners. Given the above mentioned constraints, and in order to keep with the intent of section (26.401.040.C) "to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist',we are adhering to 26.410.040.C.2c which provides that"On lots of at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport may be forward of the front facade of the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side-loaded)." In order to minimize the visual impact of the garage on the street, we have designed the house such that the garage doors will face east towards the end of the cul de sac, away from all traffic entering the neighborhood. We believe that the garage has been placed optimally for the homeowners, as well as neighbors who will not be subjected to a large garage door facing Mountain View Drive. This in conjunction with the "open arms" parti for the building form will result in the neighborly gesture of this home to passerby as well as visitors. We would like to point out that we are significantly improving upon the existing home as far as fulfilling the spirit of the code. The front door of the existing home to-be-demolished is set back 29'from the front-most wall, and is not featured prominently. Additionally, the existing house has a street-facing front-most garage, with it's sixteen foot wide door facing traffic entering the neighborhood. Additionally, a number of homes on the block do not conform to the standard outlined in this item of the code. Please see A0.1 (Subdivision Photographic Panorama) regarding the neighborhood context. 1235, 1245, 1250, 1265, 1270, 1315, 1350, 1355, and 1360 Mountain View Drive all have front doors set back further than 10'from their front-most walls. Many of these and other homes on the block have front entries which are not clearly defined, legible, and in some cases, not visible from the street. 26.410.040.D.3.a: "Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet(12) above the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. A transom window above the main entry is exempt from this standard." We seek a variance to provide for street-facing windows on the second level with lower limits at 11'- 4" above the finished first floor. We seek a variance to provide for street-facing windows on the ground level with upper limits at 10'- 0" above the finished first floor. No street-facing windows span through the area where the second floor level exists,which is between 10'-0"and 11'-4" above the finished first floor. The upstairs Master Bedroom has a fully-glazed door and sidelight facing the street leading out to a deck. Since the finished floor at the upper level is 11'-4"above the finished floor of the ground level, this glazing begins at 11'-4" above the finished first floor, and is not visible from the street due to the height of the parapet around the deck. At the entryway, glazing extends up to 10'-0" above the finished first floor, stopping at the underside of the second floor structure. This includes a glazed transom above the front door, sidelight to its left, and glazing to its right which is adjacent to the interior staircase. The first landing of this staircase is at—6'-6" above the finished first floor, and the glazing does not span between 9' and 12' above this landing. This set of windows serves several purposes: The directed plane of glazing at the center of the front fagade creates a dramatic peek through the house towards the beautiful vistas beyond, taking advantage of the building's context. By creating a dramatic contrast with the solid wood material of the front door, the glazing helps to amplify the presence of the entry door. Additionally, extending the glazing to the full height of this plane, above the porch cover, aids the expression of the building by distinguishing this element from the upper volume. No second floor windows cross where the This set of windows rise from a height of 11'-4", but second floor structure is located between 10' are hidden behind parapet walls and 11'-4" above the first floor. Significant group of windows face the street Zj n E q 0. ♦a. � v°!3 as ^n `2. III III U . .z ....< .4o- • w RYPoLrF; 3 x 4+ t .p F r , i 4 Y A r4 Garage doors face away from street as well as Front door parallel to street, and clearly visible approach into neighborhood. They will be single stall against surrounding glazing width doors. First story element: 32% of overall width of home. Exterior materials to be stone for ground floor wings, Entry porch to be 6'-0" deep, and 26'wide. and clear coated cedar siding for second floor Entry porch area will be 156 square feet. volume. 1330 Mountain View Drive South elevation rendering - January 2014 studio 303, Inc 4383 Apple Ct Boulder,Colorado 80301 City of Aspen USA Land Use Application for tel 303 589 3370 Lot Line Adjustment &Residential Design Standards Variance —studio303.us All sunhat yr tivc c onl er:p�eu Drawing Index daa1pnh.n1-ir.F�a1 en�naedn9 and hbFCanon vhal remain the reavana�bn�c�anha o,nbacm,;,, A0.0 Title Page&Renderings ras,­m,.AN .a. ad enylemaby andplaro maea t, A0,1 West Meadow Subdivision p,eemte birt drawngsarathe p,apam Nth.o,,ne,,and wa,e A1.0 Site Plan a,a,�ad ru uv.ln�annasan v.;m me - A1.1 Basement Plan spaci a mama. A1.2 Ground Level Plan A1.3 Upper Level Plan A2.1 South&East Elevations professional registrations A2.2 North&West Elevations - cammda 20.125 AN G,dhrArtFllacl Lkencu mm ers leans 21955 ew Maskv ou-1 -A- 126059 seal&signature G� CI �O ,. R -- _�.- consultant name and address `y• k - - - — original issue da[es. Schematic Design t ti 23 December,2013 revisions: `F proiact Private Residence 1330 Mountain View Dr, Aspen,CO drawing title Title Page &%R 'ED PE u@ drawing scale none JAN16 20M drawing number CITY O�OPMENT Ao .o COMMUNI'N ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- studio 303, Inc ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4383 Apple Cf. Boulder,Colorado 80301 z USA tel 303 669 3370 —.studlo303.us ..d b,ft 0—, rd wero z L -------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ........... . ------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - professional registration -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A�00.A,,—d 1—. c,,Wd. =1 s T... 2105 WARB mcso seat&signature r Al F� 71� --------------------------- -- -------------- ------------------------------- ---------------- --------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------- ------- ------ ---------- ------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .......... consultant name and address --- ------- % 12=SD- ------------------------------------------------------- I----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 06D. 270. I It original issue dates: ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- 1110. 16, Schematic Design 23 December,2013 ---------------- ---------------------- 13M. ------------------ us. ------------ revisions: ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- n it t 1 ji i t t project Private Residence ad it ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------1 1 L-------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- ----------- ------------------------------------------------------- 1330 Mountain View Dr, ------------- Aspen.CO ----- ...... ---------------------------------- -------- -------------——---------------- --------------------------------- ----------------------- drawing title Subdivision Photographic Panorama drawing scale 1:1000 draving number ---------- ----------------- --------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------ ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ---------- ----------------------- West Meadow Subdivision AO. 1 Scale:1:1000 studio 303, Inc 433 A/ Bou der,Colorado 80301 / USA / CUT LINE AA CUT LINE AA tel 303 669 3370 ~.studic303.us \ All—Wn or Mis d'-1.,.P,... /^\ aesQn inten[on/y.19—mgne— ` / \ re's ceho h A Um p ansr EJity fN M t i nrenebr.AA. . W d m gemnh dpi doted or i p•esenhdbytl dr vnrg .the property ofthe CTVner.antl r�•ere r reared mr aee m rannemar•1mm me i specified Prgett. i - professional registrations I AI GIMarArt a enact w bes lj Cobredo 2p}1�•6 J/ Net.Me[icu OP5051 NcARa 121DStl a seal&signature CUT LINE AA CUT LINE AA I'll G��QN GoNs� ® 2 Site Plan-North N 1.0 Scale:1/B"=1'-0" \ O consultant name and address Fence</=72"tall original issue dates: Fence 4=72"tall - \, Schematic Design 23 December,2013 ---Fence</=72"tall io j 29'-31 .visions' 1 project � I Private Residence j' 1330 Mountain View Dr, t Aspen,CO 1 j drawing title Site Plan I drawing scale 118"=1'-0" Site Plan drawing number 1 M 1. scale:116"=1'-0" / I If studio 303, Inc _ I 4383 Apple Ct, % I B er.Colorado 60301 % I USA _ I tel 303 66y 3370 - I wv�w.studio303.us � I I AU—Wp br P,It m[umepl exv,.tt / j retwm'maey orwe:�nr„n,[or / N60�,AN j +p�mrmt end�naKVaa P'. buIld =en 1 Pre'.P'.'.”'r«u:e�cpecnen w:m ax j/ I m.aealn[q�n. I professional registrations AN.'E A.... Lkeb[a naibe,t i I Tobra@ ZOJi26 i f/ I New Nkxlco pPPPPt NCARa 126p5p /+ I / I seal&signature /! I i G015 i UP c _ 7816-11" i �--- consultant name and address i 1 i I ® 11 / � I i original issue dates: i I Schematic Design, i 23 December,2013 revisions: I — j I — 1 — G,o I I project -- i Private Residence 1330 Mountain View Dr, ® Aspen,CO i' i drawing title I Basement Plan I drawing scale 1/4"=1'-0" ® 1 Basement Plan ` -- drawing number N 1.1 Scale:114"=1'-0" A1 . 1 studio 303, Inc 4383 Apple Ct, Boulder.Colorado 80301 USA tel 3036693370 wwyy.studic,303.us d.—W d / O � feswostnan.rme:.Mf..r.r w p—mb,d by th—&—gs fth.0—,.�— I pi--d m AM t. professional registrations T. 20Ci26 21955 sea[&signature c1d 828'-5" consultant name and address UP ...... ...... ......... original issue dates: Schematic;Design /* 23 December,2013 revisions • ---------- ---------------- ------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- project Private Residence 1330 Mountain View Dr, Aspen,CO drawing title Ground Level Plan drawing scale drawing number Ground Level Plan Scale:114"=1'-0" A1 .2 studio 303, Inc I 4383 Apple C[, / Boulder.Colorado 80301 USA tel 303 665 3370 \ www.studio303,us d i mHar d1&docommrta-ir r ticeign is On h final anyineming ,M fabdcauon shat remain Me FnrespMicaMr.an,.A of the contractor m / I N Meer daagna. / \ I D,esm�d M dlese bnvrings meths iprupe,ty orthe G.n and wme i r-.d ror uw in connectimi vith the sDacl6ed prujett. / I I /. prGid Acnal reoisirations I AO GIdfm Arthtlen is rn umCers i. j Cobrede n2UJo26 Texe4 219.6 / ) I -ARBVke 1260 Q / I i seal&signature ! I / I i j, i i OPEN TO I consultant name and address j BELOW 78391-9., /j / - ( original issue dates: / - I 2 Schematic Design _ DN I � 23 December,2013 / OPEN TO OPEN TO � '�-" BELOW / BELOW j I np I j revisions: f — i r — i• / O I I i / I i -- i — j i project I Private Residence i f 1330 Mountain View Dr, j' Aspen,CO i I j drawing title I Upper Level \ + Plan i drawing scale 1/4'•=1'-0•• _ - i drawing number 1 Upper Level Plan - 1. Scale 114 -V-:: 2.1 .._...... .__._. .. j Al I studio 303, Inc 4383 Apple Ct, -------Historic grade per survey Bculd e r,Colorado 80301 USA tel 3036693370 wtw-studic303.us I--.L IOZ04-� AU,—Of ft, Proposed Lot Line-----------N I m...*.F'W e gi—dmq —im Oh. rep,sobday of the caMnbM ft m bl bb'.Aje..'downs. 11=9--Ild pl—md—d p—.bNd by ft. ft 'P-A'd P"j- -----------Existing Lot Line professional registrations MM '0..' Roof Point I seat&signature Roof Point cof Point Historic grade per survey----------- % ' G P o Roof P?jn 10'-1 3/8. cot Point 4Q'-1 1" 27".0- I consultant name and address ------- Historic grade per survey Roof Point 10'0 112" Proposed Lot Line----------- Roof Po in original issue dates: 70. Schematic Design 23 December,2013 Roof Point Historic grade per survey---------- Roof P?5*./ 1,7 Roof f'P=4t revisions: //' 3y 7 10�O 1/2' 1 T—� Roof P Deck oLl —T 110'-3- Roof Po!nt Roof Pcin)./ Of Pqn�/ Roof Pq n./ .......... project Existing Lot Line----------- Private Residence 6 1330 Mountain View Dr, Aspen,CO -----------Historic grade per survey ----------Existing Lot Line drawing title ...... Roof Plan -----------Natural grade per survey drawing scale 118"=1'-0" O drawing number Roof Plan A1 .4 2 1 1��l�4 Scale:1/8" 1-0" studio 303, Inc 4363 Apple Ct. Boulder.Colorado 80301 USA tel 303 669 3370 2T Envelope —�Q—Highest point of roof LOL wviw.studio303.us --52'-0 -----.\ i�— 51' AO:onti.WDa nis tlocwnentia 6.s 25'Envelope 25 Envelope daay�n bront aay.Faai.n 25'Envelope w.—._.—_�--. _pe aw,nday v 52-2, — f---. aaa rabn�nnaa,ha®rama;a ma 5�'-6 -- = Q ` 52'-4" r poncbJAy.ffl,cw nctww N N rabricabr.Al ideas devn- -r VA.—and A.-mdcated w Npre-1bd by mesa drewb9s are the tad M uca in conneeden.wm tM N / paperty ofthe[ZVrKr,and rrcre �/ /// specmed project, T professional registrations AN GIdh,RrtMeq L¢ente n�aberc C.brada 301. �- •"/r /// '//' t N Aft ilco t26 '—------'—'--- --------------------------- --------- ------------------ ----'---------- ------------------'---'--'—.-- ----'— ----'------------------' Interior Floor Level seal&signature v n %r /i %/ O��\ GO", FL —------------------------------- ------ ----- — —'-- ------- -------'----- ---—'--- Interior Floor Level — 6-5 consultant name and address 6'-0"deep cover over front porch \ Historic Grade Below Point on Roof \ __ —Historic Grade Below Point on Roof \\ Historic Grade Below Point on Roof Historic Grade Below Point on Roof % T-0" V 27'-2' 7 South Elevation 2.1 Scale:1/4"=T-O" original issue dates: Schematic Design 23 December,2013 revisions: 25'Envelope �------- 25'Envelope - _ m 52'_2" — q _ N O project --'—'—'—'-----'— ----—'—'--'--'---—'— '— —---'----—'—'—'—'———'--'—'—'——'—'—'—'-----------' for Floor Level Inter -- - -----'---X39—_9 — Private Residence 1330 Mountain View Dr, Aspen,CO drawing title ' South & East -----'------------ ------- --- " Elevations -: ------------- ------'---------'-------------- Interior Floor Level ---' � F S2 8�5'�'— \` Historic Grade Below Point on Roof \ Historic Grade Below Point on Roof drawing scale 114"=l'-0" drawing number 2 East Elevation 2.1 Scale:1/4"=T-O" //per\\ /� 2 l s 1 studio 303, Inc 4383 Apple Ct, Boulder,Colorado 80301 USA tel 303 669 3370 -w.studio303.us 25'Envelope AN comem.f thie a.1--t oxprase —'—'- m 52'-2" t--- dbbawtl.n shelren,nin me 25'Envelope sign intent .Final en�needng —'�---- 25'Envelope AM onhe,d.ti,im m O e N preuntnd M These drewln ricrhe She N pmp.rryo eownec ana war specified // // br oee b c.nM.u.n.itn ine d proje professional registrations AN Gld Archnen ucene nunCms �` TeFeredu a Ygo'36 S—Nol -ARe 26g5g — — --'—' --' -------- Interior Floor Level seal&signature 399'_9'-9" _ a �G — --- --'—'—'—'—'—'—' --------------------____;___ Interior Floor Level Patios and fences not shown for drawing clarity Historic Grade Below Point on Roof 28'-5" consultant name and address 26,_9-- �Historic Grade Below Point on Roof — X27'-2" \` Historic Grade Below Point on Roof 1 North Elevation 2. Scale:1/4"=1'-0" original issue dates: v Schematic Design 23 December,2013 revisions: 'En —. ,2. Envelope 52'-0" 25'Envelope Highest point of roof project - .-_._..-.____-_ _----------- Interior Floor Level -------------'----'-- --------------------- '--- -------'-'-- --------------------------------'-'------------'- '-'- -- ------------------------ --'--'---------------------------$ — Private Residence 39 9 1330 M Otain View Dr, Aspen, drawing title North & West Elevations -----------------------------------' ------------------------------ Interior Floor Level $.—.—.— ' Patios and fences not shown for drawing clarity Historic Grade Below Point on 26Roof 26'-5" '_y' -- R •� _ Historic Grade Below Point on Roof drawing scale 114"=1'-G" •�` Historic Grade Below Point on Roof �Q- `� West Elevation 27-0" drawing number 2 2. Scale:1l4"=1'-0" CITY OF ASPEN CITY OF ASPEN MONUMENT Z 5-159 N N FOUND 03 RESAR IMPROVEMENT SURVEY \ N BENCHMARK-7824.824.77' \ 12.0' LOT 5 BLOCK 1 DRAEASEM UTILITY EASEMENT _ rS6�• BK.2A PG.265 WEST MEADOW SUBDIVISION 9'000 PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO CITY OO.1„r"Z�°` LS YPC \T O 2376 \ #5 REBAR \ NO CAP O 5 10 20 + l' = 10' DRAINAC 7826 E/UTIUTY EASEMENT BK.2A PG.245 / NOTES / 1) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 5,BLOCK WEST MEADOW AS SET FORTH ON THE PLAT RECORDED 80, JUNE 9,1958 IN N AT PAGE 2 PLAT BOOK 2A AT PAGE 245 AS RECEPTION NO.106400 IN THE ORNNAGE/UTIUTY COUNTY OF PITKIN,STATE OF COLORADO. EASEMENT 2)BASIS OF BEARING: 2A PG.245 A BEARING OF S05'18'00"W BETWEEN A FOUND REBAR AND YPC LS#2376 AT THE N.E. Ix PROPERTY CORNER AND A FOUND REBAR AND YPC LS#2376 AT THE S.E.PROPERTY. 3)TITLE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,ORDER NO. / I 062005200-2,DATED 04/12/2013 FOR THE PREPARATION OF THIS SURVEY. 4) RECORD SUBDINSION ACCURATELY PLAT LACKS SUFFICIENT BEARINGS AND DISTANCES TO LOT 4 •,l RATELY LOCATE SUBJECT LOT AND THUS IS SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS.BEARINGS AND DISTANCES IN( )ARE FROM RECORD PLAT. ALL OTHERS ARE EITHER SCALED,CALCULATED,OR TAKEN FROM MONUMENTS FOUND IN THE FIELD AND SHOWN ON THIS SURVEY. 51 POSTED ADDRESS IS 1330 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE. LOT 5,BLK 1 I 6)UNIT OF MEASUREMENT FOR THIS SURVEY IS THE U.S.SURVEY FOOT. 5)ELEVATIONS BASED UPON CITY OF ASPEN GSP MONUMENT S-159 1988 DATUM. 15,415 SQ.FT.±(record) I BENCHMARK-7824.77'AT N.W.PROPERTY CORNER. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 1(ONE)FOOT. B)ACCORDING TO FIRM MAP 05097CO203 C,PANEL 203 OF 325,DATED JUNE 4,1987, 14,757 SQ.FT.f(Cale) SAID LOT IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN ZONE X AND OUTSIDE THE 500 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN. 07' 7)CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING RESTRICTIONS: DLr ' I SETBACK RESTRICTIONS:R-15 ZONE DISTRICT REGULATIONS. SIDE YARDS:10.0' REAR YARD:10.0' HOT D9" FRONT YARD:25.0'RES.30.0'ACCESSORY TUB Loa % 9)NO NATURAL HAZARDS WERE FOUND TO AFFECT SAID PARCEL ACCORDING TO MAPS LOT 6 PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN'S ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. + / WOOD . DECK \ 9 / /1 CRAWL 'DL10' SPACE 7827—� � LEGEND ® INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED. YPC ALC AL YELLOW C CAP MI UM CAP B\� SINGLE FAMILY �^ RPC RED PLASTIC CAP / 2 RESIDENCE YPC / pQ GAS METER OT TELEPHONE RISER LS#29030 + / / //� / S% /114• F17 . 43'/ E pPC / o/ \•�14, pQ ELECTRIC METER © CABLE RISER N'1 LS/90187 rvq > /J J ° / / WATER METER # T WOOD FENCE LINE LS#901 / / y� / ,z OEN O.H. OVERHANG TYPICAL (j--e�CIiA1N LINK FENCE UNE DECIDUOUS TREE o , ^�ry ��\ 2z // MOD DECK \\�� �7e // F PINE TREE D9'(DECIDUOUS 9 INCH DIAMETER TRUNK) P6"(PINE 6 INCH DIAMETER TRUNK) DLS'(DRIP LINE 8 FEET) / ASPHALT 10.0' DRIVEWAY SETBACK ` I SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE .211 BK.185 PG I,MICHAEL P.LAFFERTY,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP ACCURATELY DEPICTS AN 1 IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT PERFORMED UNDER MY SUPERVISION ON 05/2013 OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND. THE LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL q IMPROVEMENTS,EASEMENTS,RIGHTS—OF—WAY IN EVIDENCE OR KNOWN TO ME AND \ ENCROACHMENTS BY OR ON THESE PREMISES ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN. ERROR OF P26• CLOSURE IS LESS THAN 1/15,000. DL19' c� 25.0' I / I SETBACK BN.195 PG.211 If MICHAEL P.LAFFERTY PLS.#37972 VICINITY MAP I"� u 00' oL9 LS eme O9' ) // DATE: d D z' (CI) D8• DB' ALC / I DL9' DL9' LS#33645 / CT'7 / YPC LS#23]fi Rocky Moonlaln Surveylnp / �rti0 DATE SURVEYED: 08/2004 CURVE TABLE REVISED: 05/2019, 09/2013 FILE 04523 moxauvnr EDGE of PAVEMENT I CURVE I LENGTH RADIUS ANGELA CHDRD I BEARING I DELTA CLIENT::T AI,LM.AN MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE / CI 95.50 310.00 48.13 95.12 N86'30'IS'v 17.39.03' N]OCY.a1.PN^9.d C2 6.86 4.33 4.39 6.16 S49•l0'23'E 90'49'06' `abp1dw CO!1627 NOTICE:AttvMinga Calomdv taw you m,.atm®aaa aay legal acriaa beW 50.O'RO.W. PW:706d7P1010 upvv svY dcftttin Wia amvry wiNm Wxee Ynn after YV+6ss discavasacbdc[ flea0 .' Iv va mrnt may any acliav bash upon eny def melds smVCyx mmmmcW smm MII®.vpl.n m,nw,nma 6om m.aau orma coas�doa smwn nnwwn. #5 REBAR NO AP MINOR PLAT AMENDMENT WEST MEADOWS SUBDIVISION LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LOTS 4 & 5, BLOCK 1 rzG?�e CITY OF ASPEN g #5 REBAR PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO NO CAP CS 200• 0 10 BO 40 LOT a,BLxI HA�f�a0�5 we 1' = TI P,SG95QFFa(,) CtdANa 20' t, LSO 2376 CITY OF ASPEN IT]365QFf s(�) .J` MONUMENT S-159 NOTES �1 -E c 1) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: RPC LOT 4,BLOCK 1,WEST MEADOW SUBDIVISION AND LOT 5,BLOCK 1,WEST MEADOW LS/16129 S"� #5 REBAR SUBDIVISION,AS SET FORTH ON THE PLAT RECORDED JUNE 9,1958 IN PLAT BOOK 2A 0 NO CAP COLORAE 45 AS RECEPTION NO.106400 IN THE COUNTY OF PITKIN,STATE OF D IS 30 60 2)BASIS OF BEARING: 30' T .E. 29 Lsi o3 A BEARING OF SOSI8�00"W BETWEEN A FOUND REBAR AND YPC LS#2376 AT THE N PROPERTY CORNER OF LOT 5 AND A FOUND REBAR AND YPC LS#2376 AT THE S.E. PROPERTY OF LOT 5. YPC IUTCNINO EN OUN GIP a3 \ BEIWEIN FOUND N LS/29 3 PROPERTY YIXW T 5 $$ ro Go M LOT 5 3)TITLE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,ORDER £. W {zu so.FC) > � \ 062005200-2,DATED 04/12/2013 FOR THE PREPARATION OF THIS SURVEY. NO- YPC 29 SISyB� RPC N LS#29030 23' S►9015 o RPC 7 LOT S,BLKI \ zRZS 00 E' 4) RECORD SUBDIVISION PLAT LACKS SUFFICIENT BEARINGS AND DISTANCES TO p LS#90IB 2.00 liAli SOIL.a(—.d) CITY OF ASPS 0 ACCURATELY LOCATE SUBJECT LOTS AND THUS IS SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT °a i 14.�s�sQFi.z(cdc) M O.11 NT \\ \ \ OTHERS NTERPRETATIONS. EITHER BEARINGS ALED.AND CALCULATED,OR TAKENAFROA MONUMENTS FOUND IN FIELD AND SHOWN ON THIS SURVEY. \ \ 5) POSTED ADDRESS IS 1330 AND 1340 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE. Z \ 6)UNIT OF MEASUREMENT FOR THIS SURVEY IS THE U.S.SURVEY FOOT. N RPC'� \ LS#9016 Cl A £ \ 567 12.0' ALC \� 46 00F DRAINAGE/UTUTY LS#33645 YPC 6.0' \ / 40. EASEMENT LS/2376 DRAEASEMEUTLITY BK.2A PG.245 EASEMENT / T YPC aw BK.2A PG.245 \ LOT 4,BLKI / LS#2376 MOUM1TAI.\�t1y DRIVE `r / T— I1,1185Q.FC.e ,p.0• _� \ / T LEGEND SETBACK INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED. ORAINAGE/ / o 6'0 UTIDTY INDICATES SET MONUMENT ALU.CAP LS#37972 EASEMENT RPC RED PLASTIC CAP CRRTIRCAIEOP DEDICATION ANp OWNERSNW ry 0 EX 2A PG.245 CERTIFICATEOFOEOICATION ANO OWIWERSMP \ y / YPC YELLOW PLASTIC CAP KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT BEING THE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT ALC ALUMINUM CAP OWNER.MORTGAGEE OR LIEN HOLIER CERTAIN fiFAl PROPERTY LOCATED IN PIMIN COUNTY, BEING THE / COLORADO,DESCRIBED ON THIS PUT AS LOT 4,BLOCK 1,WEST MEADOW SUBDIVISION. OWNER,MORTGAGEE OR LIEN HOLDER OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO,DESCRIBED ON THIS PLAT AS LOT 5,BLOCK 1,WEST MEADOW SUBDIVISION. —� OWNER HAS CAUSED THE PROPERTY TO BE LAID OUT,SURVEYED AND PLATTED AS SHOWN ON OWNER HAS CAUSED THE PROPERTY TO BE LAID WT,SURVEYED AND PU1TE0 AS SHOWN Ct1 YPC / I 10.0' THIS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT. THIS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT. LS/29030 SETBACH zs.0' lo.p' / LOT S,BLK1 I EXECUTED THIS__DAY OF A.D.2014. EXECUTED THIS_DAY OF A.D.2014. ST BN.185 PG2/1 SETBACK /L//�_ / L5,039 sQ ET e OWNER / 0.0' OVNEFt / SETBACK I . YPC NOTARYP C LORADO)ATE NOTARYPUBLICCERnFl m LS/290 STATE OF COLOfLADO)� STATE OF COLORADO) Z COUNTY OF PITKIN ) )SS I I -m° COUNTY OF PITON ) �. THE 014 FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS_DAY_ THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS__DAY o I OF 201{BY OF OF 2014 BY OF < y 3 0 I . WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL MTNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ypp RPC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MY COMMISSION EXPIRES LS/29030 S/901 +69• S53.48'0 t'E I ' NOTARY PUBUC 2 64 NOTARY PUBUC $ I f 10.0' Z COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SETBACK 85 PG.21 THIS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT OF LOTS 4&5,BLOCK 1 WEST MEADOWS SUBDIVISION HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH 25.0' THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE BY SETBACK THE CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR THIS DAY BK.185 PG.211 SURVEYORS CERiRICATE OF 2014. LSO RPC 9018 CZ I,MICHAEL P.LAFFERTY,BEING A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF COLORADO, DO HEREBY CERTIFY OF ALL PARCEL BDJNDARIESAREDACCIURATFLYNAND CORREC7LTY PLAT,SHONNTMHEREON. ALC-- LS/33645 THAT THE SANE ARE BASED UPON FIELD SURVEYS AND CONFORM TO THOSE AS STAKED UPON YPC THE GROUND.ERROR OF CLOSURE IS LESS THAN 1/15,000. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR LS#7,376 VICINITY MAP (I"=400') IN WITNESS THEREOF,I HAVE SET MAY HAND AND SEAL THIS_DAY OF 2014. MICHAEL P.LAFFERTY PLS#37972 5 DATE �3 CITY ENGINEER'S REVIEW THIS PLAT WAS REVIEWED FOR THE DEPICTION OF THE ENGINEERING ACCEPTANCEFDFI ECOROIWG DEPARTMENT SURVEY REQUIREMENTS THIS_ Rocky Mountain Su DAY OF 2013. THIS LOT UNE AD,AISTMENT PUT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED FOR FILING IN THE OFFICE OF THE Ana DATE SURVEYED: 082013 _VN CLERK AND RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF PITKIN.STALE OF COLORADO. REVISED: __—___ PAGE LO S'RECE.THIS—DAY OF IN PUT BOOK__AT PAGE_AS RECEPTION NUMBER__ PILE N0: 13528 CITY ENGINEER CLIENT:TALLMAN {100 eryam spHep�ad '+'�I+� N0110E:ASOrd'mS to Colorado law yav must ccmmrneeany legal action hasty{ CLERK k RECORDER ph4,0.40.117 tY upon avY de&q wrhia susvry within Ouce Yevn aRvpv 6saduwvaarh d� (a 9T1i�d�I In no event maymy aRionhasedupon my J advs mvry bcco,msn drama 4RQanPsM'aM shoo ten yeah fivm she date ofthe catifi®aw shmvn homy. ' i DEO/C4TiON - - I NOTARY S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT j KNOW AGL MEN B✓ THESE PRESENTS: Tho/ /he undzr signed,being fh¢ ou n¢r of o Par}y .STATE OF COLORADO] Mc SsN%Sccf on/, T/O S,R-BS N.! of/hc 6�/PM.,hos /aid ou/, subs'✓id¢d and p/o//¢d/hc som¢ Coun}y o! Pi/kin J 5S. _ ` into lots, b/o chs, on¢ d iv¢ and one rood under fh¢ nomc and sfy/ of fhc {PEST MEADOW The foreny p/o/ and S d dico/ion of fha HEST MEAOOw_ SUB-O/!i/5/ON iz sochnoa./s d9 UB-O N an/[r/5'Od does fi¢r¢bt' Can✓¢y Jo P f�Fin Counf do /;for Pub/e u5¢, Y/i¢p/o/1¢d Maunfoin bet m¢ this / y of _/9sB, by P,oy v oom. -' -- !//¢w Ori✓c and J✓o/h Rood. �'v��(•/ f%5 ' My commss%on ¢XPir¢s -�zan¢r - IV W.}nJ ss my do�on d' fs ciof s¢o/ SURVEYORS A 10AN 177 M.B/oyA,/.ccns¢d b proc/ic¢ in/hc.°/o/¢of Co%rodo do hci¢by - _ ... and p/of of/h¢ NYEST MEADOW SVB-O/y/S/ON r✓cr¢ mod¢ by mm and fhaf both o .vfc ro fh¢ � b¢st of nr {/nou,/¢oy¢ o d b¢/i¢F. No irrigofion d'/dcs r ¢oscmcn/s Jh¢r¢f orc'c ✓idmnc¢ ocross o r porhbn a sold proParfy cxc¢pf os shoran on/h¢ oc_c¢omoo tiny pi t.- ' ® - �CE' �� -yam f / Sur✓¢yor Sudscribcd and sworn to bcforc m¢/his J`� d r of_�n:.P- AO" /9.'SB. - - I My commission ¢XPir¢5�rf1- O/'i /9(�� - PLAT Oc' THE WEST MEADOW SUB-DIVISION APPROVALS I Possad by/h¢ P.%hi/cozen/y Zaniny Commission thisLdoy of L /9s6 Sifuof¢d in fh¢ o'_- j swy S¢c. T.-/O-S., P/TKIN COUNT-COLO. in=50 A. Th¢/or¢yoiny P/o/is occ¢ptcd fo fi%y and con✓cyonc¢ Therein un/` is occ p/cd by}/¢ Boord of P/Rin cove//' commission¢s /h,'sdoy of /ysa, sub,/ //a}A¢ Prov,'sion /ho/ fhc Co s/o//not ur,d¢r foRz h¢mo%nf¢nonc¢ f such roods un/.i sofisfocfo y cons/uchbn /d¢r¢o! by subdivid¢r Acc Pf¢d A—/hhy in fdc P fRin Goun/y c/h R cord¢rs offs¢/h:'s i i ,Ocpu/y iP/of Book k A..1, :/1 P gc f-: Kcc Pfion No. - � 5.89130E 9/' I' � �• � �r !:,'%'s I�_��terss onr/M,�/o,ncv'_w G.vv ` I V o i 0 ' 34.�+ s o/Tic w�sQ shy n round ¢och /of e.'-c'c�oi on rood —_ N:? i I- AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: O idea �� �+k De,,VQ- , Aspen, CO REDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: �e -joc D r S 4 , 20j Lj STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, In ct, p n ( -A p"+', -) (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) oft 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. 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, suminanzed 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 surnrnary, 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, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text aniendnient. 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. (lurk SignaAde The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this (&day of Mr , 20 A,by i 1,1, MVI ..►n PUBLIC NOTICE RE:1330 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE- T 7� 7 T T REQUESTS AL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCE WITNESS SS T Y HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing YV 1 1 1 V J 1�'1 1 HAND V it will be held on Tuesday,April 1st,at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m.before the Aspen Planning and M 1SSlOn eXYY11IreS: Zoning Commission,Sister Cities Room,City Hall, > commission p 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to consider an applica- Dr.,submitted d The Joseph P.Tallman Legacy 4 � Trust for the property located 1330 Mountain View and represented b Ali f Chor o Studio 303,Inc. and Michelle Fran el of Choreotect Studio.The applicant is requesting variances related to Resi- dential Design Standards. Notary Public The property.is legally described as Lot 5,Block 1, West Meadow Subdivision according to the Plat thereof ya e Ditch S 245,C bnd T wns te of Aspen,Parcel ID KAREN REED PATTERSON y For further information,contact Sara N adoinat the City of Aspen Co mm unity De- NOTARY PUBLIC velopment Department,134SG91e 2S Aspen, 7 O2 . 7 STATE OF COLORADO sara.nadolny @oityofaspen.com EIMENTS AS APPLICABLE: NOTARY ID#19964002767 Aspen Planning and Zoning En aP sbn (TION My Commission Expires February 15,2016 2014. [1001418A2]pen Times Weekly on March 13, ;POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. x'24-65.5-103.3 I AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1330 Mountain View Drive,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: April 1,2014 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, AL i � (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: 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 I day of P_AL _ , 20 t , 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, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. 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 publi inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) d y prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Sign ture The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this (� day of 20i, by L/ i1-),cA ` WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Andrea Guderian Notary Public My commission expires: State of Colorado Notary ID 20134046840 My Commission Expires July 29,2017 'Is rotary Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPYOF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3 BASS RAIFIEL I REV TRUST 50% 1362 SNOWBUNNY LANE LLC AMORY DAVID S BASS MICHELE N REV TRUST 50% PO BOX 345 1370 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 1345 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611-1029 BD DEVELOPMENT LLC BRITVEN CAROLYN&THOMAS CARISCH GEORGE L REV TRUST 50% 210 AABC#MM 11711 COUNTRY WY 681 E LAKE ST#262 ASPEN,CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77024 WAYZATA, MN 55391 CASE JULIE KENNER F P&P LLC FREY JOHN L 1265 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 3510 DUMBARTON 1295 RED BUTTE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77025 ASPEN, CO 81611 GAMSON MICHAEL GAMSON MICHAEL JOHNSON MATTHEW&KAREN 1325 SAGE CT 8723 CRESCENT GATE 5736 EL CAMPO ASPEN,CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77024 FORT WORTH,TX 76107 JOSEPH MARK C&AGNETE KENNER JULIE GRANTOR TRUST LICHTENWALTER DAYLENE G TRST 50% 1300 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR PO BOX 4203 1265 RED BUTTE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-1083 LIEB NOAH B LITTLE LEAF LLC LIZOTTE JEFFREY W&DIANNE 1270 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 604 W MAIN ST 1345 SAGE CT ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 MAPLE MICHAEL C&JULIE MASTER KATHRYN I MCCARTHY MARGARET 1250 MTN VIEW DR 1270 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 1370 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 MELVILLE FAMILY TRUST MELVILLE GRAIG W&TERESA M LEE MOUNTAIN CHALET ENTERPRISES INC 1290 SNOWBUNNY LN 1286 SNOWBUNNY LN 333 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEILEY MARIANNE PENINSULA LLC REESE JOHN W PO BOX 3106 C/O STEVENS BRIAN M 1340 SNOWBUNNY LN ASPEN, CO 816123106 700 W FRANCIS ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ROMERO DWAYNE&MARGARET T SEGROP LTD SEID MEL 1340 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 411 SWEET BAY AVE 1104 DALE AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 PLANTATION, FL 33324 ASPEN, CO 81611 SEYBOLD FAMILY LIVING TRUST SPALDING MICHAEL L&SUSAN W SWARTZ ROBIN F 03/30/2005 1360 SNOWBUNNY LN 14740 MULHOLLAND DR 1285 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR ASPEN,CO 81611 LOS ANGELES,CA 90077 ASPEN,CO 816111027 TIERNEY MICHAEL P&CATHY C TRIPPLEHORN FAMILY PTNSHP LTD ZIMET MILLARD&SUSAN 1245 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR PO BOX 470608 1315 MTN VIEW DR ASPEN,CO 81611 FORT WORTH,TX 76147 ASPEN,CO 81611 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 1330 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE— RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCE REQUESTS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 1st, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Joseph Tallman of The Joseph P. Tallman Legacy Trust for the property located 1330 Mountain View Dr., represented by All Gidfar of Studio 303, Inc. and Michelle Frankel of Choreotect Studio. The applicant is requesting variances related to Residential Design Standards. The property is legally described as Lot 5, Block 1, West Meadow Subdivision according to the Plat thereof filed June 9, 1958, in Ditch Book 2A, Page 245, City and Townsite of Aspen, Parcel ID# 273501308006. For further information, contact Sara Nadolny at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2739, sara.nadolny@cityofaspen.com cityofaspen.com s/LJ Erspamer Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on April 13th,2014 City of Aspen Account L PUBLIC , O ! ICE Date: i �l Time: 4:30 pm (Place: City Hall, 130 S Galena St Sister Cities Root Purpose:: Joseph €'. Tallman Legacy Trust. 8© Inca Pkwy, Boulder CO 80303, as owner of this property, is proposing to redevelop the existing home on this site The applicant mil appear before the Plarimrig&,c otlintl Cornini&siOn on the rf;'Wr Yime at)"e t ar�r�3 use re:v,a4v�tival! trrt)Itrcft' n Resirtentr;If CJesfg tt�rodr rcf vananc:o>. Table 4: Residential Design Standards Residential Design Characteristic Required Not Required Ir Houses should be parallel, or square, to the street. ✓ Fences should be no more than 42 inches tall between a house and the street. ✓ New houses should include a second, smaller structure on the property, such ✓ as a detached garage or shed. The width of a house should be wider than the width of a garage. ✓ L Garages should be located 10 feet behind the front face of a house. ✓ Garage doors should be single stall doors (2 smaller doors for a 2-car garage ✓ rather than 1 large door). Garage entrances should not be more than 24 feet wide. ✓ Driveway cuts should not be more than 2 feet higher or lower than the street ✓ level The front door to a house should face the street. ✓ The front door should not be more than 10 feet behind the front face of the ✓ house. Houses should have porches. ✓ Houses should have windows on the street side. ✓ 2-story houses should have a one story architectural feature, such as a porch. ✓ Only 1 "shaped* window that is not square or rectangular should be allowed ✓ on each side of a house. Light wells and stairwells should be on the side of houses - not facing the ✓ street side. Building materials should be used in ways that are true to their form. For example, stone supports wood so it should be placed at the bottom of a ✓ structure with wood above. Highly reflective building materials should not be used for the exterior of houses. Houses along a street should have a similar setback from the property ✓ line. New houses should relate to the scale of adjacent, existing houses. ✓ One element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner ✓ of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. Parking accessed from the alley. ✓ Street facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor would typically exist (between 9 and 12 feet above the first ✓ finished floor). Cemetery Lane Character Area Plan 52