Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.cu.Frenzel 329 Park Ave. ADU 2737-181-58-001CASE] ,D SUMMARY SHEET - CITY OF 'EN DATE RECEIVED: 12/27/96 CASE # A 102 -96 DATE COMPLETE: STAFF: --Mary Laeknei c-Het, -S, PARCEL ID # 2737 - 181 -58 -001 PROJECT NAME: Frenzel Conditional Use for ADU & Stream Margin Review Project Address: Park Avenue 3 J APPLICANT: Otto Frenzel Address/Phone: 11330 Templin Road Zionsville, IN 46077 (317) 873 -6360 REPRESENTATIVE: William B. Campbell Architect P.C. Address/Phone: 175 Big Hat Road Basalt, CO 81621 -9778 927 -4425 RESPONSIBLE PARTY: Other Other Name /Address: Wc) f FEES DUE FEES RECEIVED PLANNING $1050 PLANNING $1050 #APPS RECEIVED 12 PLANNING $235 PLANNING $235 # PLATS RECEIVED 12 ENGINEERING $105 ENGINEERING $105 GIS DISK RECEIVED: ENV HEALTH $0 ENV HEALTH $ CLERK $0 CLERK $ TYPE OF APPLICATION TOTAL $1390 TOTALRCVD $1390 One Step 1.10�I:t7:7_ \/.iii ❑ City Attorney City Engineer ❑ Zoning Housing ❑ Environmental Health Parks DATE REFERRED: l O APPROVAL: Staff Approval Plat Recorded: ❑ Aspen Fire Marshal ❑ City Water ❑ City Electric ❑ Clean Air Board ❑ Open Space Board ❑ Other: INITIALS: CLOSED/FILED A� DATE: 7 INITIALS: ,. ROUTE TO: ___, r) ❑ CDOT ❑ ACSD ❑ Holy Cross Electric ❑ Rocky Mtn Natural Gas ❑ Aspen School District ❑ Other: DATE DUE: I L 3 Bate: Date: Book , Page RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AT THE FRENZEL RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 329 PARK AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN PARCEL # 2737- 181 -58 -001, CITY OF ASPEN Resolution #97 - WHEREAS, The Community Development Department received an application from Mr. Otto Frenzel, owner, for a Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit of approximately four hundred and fifty (450) square feet, with dimensional variations to the front yard setback by twelve feet six inches (12'6 "), side yard setback by three feet (3'), and to the maximum allowable square footage by two hundred twenty five (225) sqaure feet, and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.40.090 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Accessory Dwelling Units may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission as Conditional Uses in conformance with the requirements of said Section; and WHEREAS, the Housing Office, City Engineering, Parks Department and Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, during a public hearing at a regular meeting on April 1, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved by a 7 -0 vote the Conditional Use for the Frenzel Accessory Dwelling Unit with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department, with condition #1 amended by the Commission during the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: That the Conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit containing approximately four hundred and fifty (450) square feet above the detached garage of the proposed Frenzel residence at 329 Park Avenue is approved with the following conditions: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit appropriate development plans in accordance with all dimensional requirements of the R -6 zone district and variances approved by the Commission for a front yard variance of 12'6" for the accessory dwelling unit and a side yard variance of 3' for the accessory dwelling unit. The final plat shall be amended to clearly show the building envelope for the Lot. The accessory dwelling unit shall be labeled and the deed restriction noted on the final plat. Parking for the ADU will be delineated on the final plat. All dimensional variations for the property shall be clearly delineated and noted on the final plat. 2. The applicant shall acquire approval from the appropriate utility companies for any proposed construction activity within utility easements prior to the issuance of any permits. 3. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the owner shall: a. Verify with the Housing Office that the allowable floor area of the Accessory Dwelling Unit contains between 300 and 700 square feet; b. Verify with the Housing Office that the ADU will contain a kitchen having a minimum of a two -burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6 -cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer; c. Provide the Housing Office with a signed and recorded Deed Restriction, a copy of which must be obtained from the Housing Office; A. Clearly identify the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on building permit plans with the minimum one (1) off - street parking space provided. 4. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office and/or the Zoning Officer shall inspect the accessory dwelling unit for compliance with all appropriate standards in Section 26.40.090 of the Code and any conditions of approval. 5. The driveway curb cut shall be no more than 10 feet in width if accommodating a single drive, no more than 18 feet in width if accommodating a double driveway. The common access and utility easement and the five (5) foot wide "pedestrian area" along the Park Avenue right -of -way shall both remain unobstructed from improvements. 6. Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy, the owner shall relocate the existing aerial utility lines underground. Any pedestal or other underground equipment shall be installed on an easement provided by the property owner and not located within a public or private right -of -way. 7. The owner is encouraged to relocate the property's mailbox to the north side of the access easement, next to the other mailboxes, to better accommodate traffic movements on Park Avenue. 8. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall comply with all standards of Section 26.58 Residential Design Standards. 9. Before a building permit is issued, the Zoning Officer will determine if adequate measures to the design of the roof have been taken to prevent the accumulation of snow at the base of the stairway leading to the accessory dwelling unit. 10. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on April 1, 1997. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ATTEST: ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING �� &t4-� Sara Garton, Chair RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE FRENZEL STREAM MARGIN REVIEW LOCATED AT 329 PARK AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN PARCEL # 2737 - 181 -58 -001, CITY OF ASPEN Resolution No. 97 - � WHEREAS, Otto Frenzel submitted for approval to the Commission an application for Stream Margin Review for the construction of a single family house with an accessory dwelling unit on the property located at 329 Park Avenue, near the intersection of Park Avenue and Regent Streets, City of Aspen parcel # 2737 - 181 -58 -001, which adjoins the Roaring Fork River; and, WHEREAS, the Planning staff received referral comments from the Engineering Department, and the Parks Department, and upon consideration of those comments recommended approval of the Stream Margin Review with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed and approved the Stream Margin Review with conditions by a 5 -0 vote on March 4, 1997. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: That it does hereby approve the Frenzel Stream Margin Review with conditions as follows: 1. The final plat shall be amended to clearly show the revised building envelopes for the Lot with top -of -slope being elevation 7,935. The accessory dwelling unit shall be labeled and the deed restriction noted. Parking for the ADU will be delineated. A fifteen foot no development setback from the top -of- slope shall also be delineated parallel to this contour on the revised and recorded plat. 2. Before issuance of any permits, a current Site Improvement Survey certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in Colorado showing the location of the non - dedicated storm sewer, any utility easements, all existing vegetation, slope percentages, wetland and riparian vegetation areas, and the Special Flood Hazard Area shall be submitted in accordance with Section 26.52.030(B)(5). 3. The applicant will continue to negotiate in good faith with the City of Aspen to grant a public access easement through the property along the Roaring Fork River for the purpose of establishing a recreational trail. Both the City of Aspen and the applicant are aware that the City is strongly encouraging this dedicated easement but cannot require it as a condition of approval. 4. The applicant shall submit site sections of the final architectural plans for the single - family residence and Accessory Dwelling Unit pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(13). The site sections shall be signed and stamped by a registered architect or engineer. The City Zoning Officer shall measure and determine height pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(10), Figure A, with the top -of -slope for the lot being elevation 7935, before issuance of any permits. 5. Pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(5), the applicant shall provide a plan addressing pollution or interference with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction before issuance of any permits. The applicant shall provide a plan to accommodate on -site drainage within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks before issuance of any permits. The applicant shall provide a plan addressing any pool/hot tub drainage before issuance of a building permit. 6. The applicant shall acquire approval from the appropriate utility companies for any proposed construction activity within utility easements prior to the issuance of any permits. 7. A landscape plan pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(11) of the Code showing only approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top -of- slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive shall be submitted before issuance of any permits. The building envelope boundary shall be approved prior to issuance of any building permits. No vegetation shall be manipulated outside the revised building envelope. Owner shall revegetate with only native plantings any soil disturbed on the site. A tree removal permit shall be required for the removal or relocation of trees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code. 8. Any development below the top -of -slope deemed essential shall only be approved by special review pursuant to Section 26.64.040(D) of the Code. 9. All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located within the no development setback or down the slope pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(12) 10. The applicant is strongly encouraged to submit a design for a storm sewer line and sewer outfall that accommodates historical drainage, and dedicate and record a storm sewer easement that allows the City to maintain and operate this storm sewer line, for review and approval by the Engineering Department. If owner does not dedicate this easement, owner shall include a note on the final plat indicating that the owner of the property is responsible for maintaining the historical drainage through the parcel. 11. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on March 4, 1997. APPROVED AS TO FORM: L), I J�= City Attomey ATTEST: c e Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Sara Garton, Chair Mr. Otto N. Frenzel, III 11330 Templin Road Zionsville, IN 46077 April 1, 1997 Community Development Department City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Frenzel Stream Margin and Conditional Use for ADU Gentlemen: This letter shall serve as authorization for Charles T. Brandt to serve as my representative in connection with the referenced matters and any other land use matter requiring City of Aspen approval. Very truly yours, Otto N. F enzel, III /ONF HH: 19922 v 1 rE-L RRT ITECT y %(U7Gfo,v. N" Frerm 11330 Tempriin goad Ziorwas, IN 40M 317-873.6380 peoernbsr 23, 'INO To whom it may ^: WilNam 9. Campbell, Atehiteat PC, 175 ei9 Hat Rd.. 6aeak CO 81621A776, 9ying W5, is my repreasnm,Wa In mam►e corrreming tt-0 property desuibed in the eccomPa^Y + ^9 emelosure erK1 16-mated on Park AMINU tber umes9i9rwM' Aspan. CO. -�" t)4 ,es\ TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THROUGH: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Director FROM: Christopher Bendon, City Planner RE: F Re vie Conditional Use for an Accessory nit (AD) - Public earing. 329 Park Avenue, near intersection of Park Avenue and Regents Streets. City of Aspen Parcel # 2737 - 181 -58 -001 DATE: February 26, 1997 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting Conditional Use approval to construct an Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) above a detached garage associated with a new single family residence. By providing this ADU, the applicant would obtain a GMQS Exemption for the single family residence pursuant to City Land Use Regulations. The property adjoins the Roaring Fork River and is subject to Stream Margin Review (ESA) criteria established in Section 26.68.040 of the Municipal Code. The applicant's Application is attached as Exhibit A, and referral comments from Engineering, Housing and Parks are included as Exhibit B. Community Develoament Staff recomm nndds, approval of the Stream Margin Review, ��'� *h ^ ^ ^.r�r� ^•+S IlS ±o.+ 1 -11 R 19 nd recommends approval of 0 Conditional Use for the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) with conditions listed 12 -19, for the subject property, 329 Park Avenue, Parcel # 2737 -181- 58 -001. APPLICANT: Otto Frenzel, represented by William Campbell, Architect P.C. LOCATION: 329 Park Avenue, located near the intersection of Park Avenue and Regent Streets. City of Aspen Parcel # 2737 - 181 -58 -001. Property adjoins the Roaring Fork River. ZONING: Medium Density Residential (R -6) PUD. ADU's are a conditional use in this zone district. CURRENT LAND USE: Vacant LOT SIZE: .312 Acres = 13,590 Square Feet. A portion of this lot is within the high water mark of the Roaring Fork River and has not been subtracted from this calculation. ALLOWABLE FAR: For lots 9,000- 15,000 square feet this zone district allows for 3,660 square feet of floor area plus 6 square feet of floor area for each additional 100 square feet of lot area up to a maximum of 4,020 square feet. This formula gives an allowable floor area of 3,935 square feet for this site. This calculation is an estimate only and based on the total size of the lot. It does not take into account slope reductions, areas within the floodplain, or any potential FAR bonuses. PROPOSED LAND USE: One detached single - family residence with a corresponding accessory dwelling unit. Detached residential dwellings are permitted uses on lots of 6,000 square feet or greater in the R -6 zone district. An ADU is a conditional use in this zone district. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Stream Margin (ESA) Review is a one -step process at a meeting before the Planning and Zoning Commission. An ESA Review may be consolidated with any other development applications. Stream Margin (ESA) Review is not a public hearing and requires no notification of the public prior to review as per Section 26.52.060(E)(4)(a). Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU's) must comply with Section 26.40.090 and require conditional use approval pursuant to Section 26.60.040 by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. It is a one -step review that requires notification to be published, posted and mailed in accordance with Section 26.52.060(E). This development is also subject to the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.58.040. The information needed to properly conduct this review has not yet been made available by the applicant. Appropriate review of the application for compliance with the Residential Design Standards will be necessary before a building permit can be issued. BACKGROUND: Dieter Bibbig created this lot through subdivision August 9, 1973. There were no conditions associated with this subdivision. Frenzel purchased the property from Dieter Bibbig on April 10, 1996. A lot line adjustment for parcels 1 &2 was approved by Staff January 10,1997. The lot is 2 currently vacant. Access to the property is through a common access and utility easement (re- aligned) which lies between the two parcels. This property is located at the base of a natural drainage basin defined by S. Park Circle to the north and Midland Park Place to the northeast, continuing up Smuggler Mountain between the two streets. A non - dedicated storm sewer currently accommodates this storm run -off through the lot to the Roaring Fork River. A storm sewer easement should be dedicated to the City of Aspen to maintain this historic storm drainage. An easement along the north- easterly property line (from Park Avenue to the Roaring Fork River), is the most logical alignment for maintenance, repair, and operation. (see Engineering Department Memorandum, Exhibit B). ADU The applicant is asking for a conditional use approval for an ADU located above a detached garage which will allow a GMQS Exemption for the single - family residence proposed. The public hearing for this conditional use review was opened February 4, 1997 and continued to March 4, 1997. The public hearing was properly noticed. Stream Margin Review This review was originally scheduled for February 4, 1997 and was tabled to February 18, 1997, in which the Planning and Zoning Commission, after discussing the project, continued the hearing to March 4, 1997, to allow the applicant to address a few issues with the Community Development Department. These were: 1) Whether or not there was an agreement formed between the applicant and Bob Nevins, Planner, concerning top -of- slope. Staff Response: Staff maintains that there was no such agreement. The applicant's representative, Bill Campbell, and Bob Nevins walked around the site and discussed top -of- slope. There were, however, no specific elevations for top -of -slope discussed, nor were there any maps drawn or agreements written. Staff has made it clear to the applicant's attorney that it is the applicant's burden of proof to represent this "agreement" with either verbal or written testimony from Bob Nevins. 3 2) A better representation of the site's topography in section view by a registered surveyor and a discussion on the top -of -slope issue with Engineering and Parks Departments. Staff Response: In a meeting on February 24, 1997, the applicant presented three site sections of the Frenzel Property prepared by Jim Reser, a registered surveyor, to Community Development, Engineering, and Parks Departments. The three departments agreed that there was no conclusive evidence to support the applicant's top -of- slope. In fact the section shown could support a more restrictive top -of -slope than that already recommended by City Staff. The applicant opted to not submit this new information to the application. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The comments from the City Engineering, Housing, and Parks Departments are included as Exhibit B. 4 STAFF COMMENTS: Stream Margin Stream Margin Review is contained within Chapter 26.68, Development in Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) of the Municipal Code. Section 26.68.040 defines stream margins as "areas located within one hundred feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or within the one hundred year floodplain where it extends one hundred feet from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or within a flood hazard area (stream margin). Development in these areas shall be subject to heightened review so as to reduce and prevent property loss by flood while ensuring the natural and unimpeded flow of watercourses. Review shall encourage development and land uses that preserve and protect existing watercourses as important features. The Frenzel property is located within one hundred feet, measured horizontally, from the Roaring Fork River. The proposed development of new detached single - family residences on the lot is subject to Stream Margin Review pursuant to Section 26.68.040 (Exhibit C). STAFF FINDINGS: Based upon review of the applicant's land use application, agency referral comments and several site visits, Community Development staff make the following findings Pursuant to Section 26.68.040, Criteria for Stream Margin Review: A. No development shall be permitted in the floodway, with the exception of bridges or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, which may be permitted by the City Engineer, provided plans and specifications are submitted to demonstrate that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Commission determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with all standards set forth below. Staff Finding_ Applicant is not proposing development in the Floodway. Applicant is in compliance of Section 26.68.040 (A) B. No development shall be permitted within one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends beyond 100 feet from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, unless the Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards set forth below: 1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposed 5 mitigation techniques on or off -site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the development; Staff Finding_ Applicant has not delineated the Special Flood Hazard Area on the submitted site plan. However, top -of -slope is more restrictive and will prohibit development in the Special Flood Hazard Area. Applicant is not proposing development below top -of -slope and is therefore in compliance with Code Section 26.68.040 (B)(1) 2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area Community Plan, Parks /Recreation /Open Space/Trails Plan Map, or areas of historic public use or access are dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. Dedications are necessitated by development's increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail facilities including public fishing access; Staff Finding: Applicant has not accurately responded. A trail through the property is shown on the "Pedestrian Trails Plan" of the Aspen Area Community Plan (see Parks Department Memorandum, Exhibit B). However, under advice from the City Attorney, the City cannot require the applicant to grant an easement for a recreational trail through this Stream Margin Review process. The applicant is strongly encouraged to negotiate in good faith with the City of Aspen to grant or sell a public access easement along the Roaring Fork River as mentioned in the AACP. 3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practical; Staff Finding: The Roaring Fork Greenway Plan includes a trail along the Roaring Fork River through the applicant's property. The applicant has not provided a plan for the implementation of this trail. Again, the applicant is strongly encouraged to negotiate in good faith with the City of Aspen to grant or sell a public access easement along the Roaring Fork River as mentioned in the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan. 4. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut/fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or building permits. The barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy; Staff Finding A landscape plan has not been submitted. The applicant has provided a building envelope based on a top -of -slope just below elevation 7930. Based on contours represented on the site plan, the definition of top -of -slope per Section 26.04.100, and site visits, Engineering has determined top -of -slope to be 0 at elevation 7,934, while the Parks Department has determined top -of -slope to be at elevation 7,936. Staff is recommending that top -of -slope be established at elevation 7,935 and the fifteen -foot no- development zone be established parallel to this contour as a condition of approval before issuance of a building permit. 5. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and /or sedimentation during construction. Increased on -site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pool or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope; Staff Findino: The applicant has not provided a plan addressing pollution or interference with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and /or sedimentation during construction. The applicant has not provided a plan to accommodate on -site drainage, or pool /hot tub drainage, within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. The submittal of this document should be a condition of approval. 6. Written notice shall be provided to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency; Staff Finding_ Not applicable. There is no alteration or relocation of the watercourse. 7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; Staff Finding: Not applicable. 8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits related to the work within the 100 -year floodplain. Staff Finding Not applicable. There is no proposed work within the 100 -year floodplain 9. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. Staff Findinge No landscape plan has been submitted. A landscape plan pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(11) addressing Section 26.68.040(B)(9) should be 7 submitted as a condition of approval for Stream Margin Review. Development deemed essential within this area may only be approved by special review pursuant to Section 26.64.040(D). 10. All development outside of the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty -five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Staff Finding: The applicant is not proposing development above this (45) degree angle. However, if the Commission accepts staffs recommendation to adjust top - of -slope to elevation 7935, the applicant may need to revise the proposed development. As a condition of approval, the Commission should require that the applicant's new design also meet this standard. 11. A landscape plan is submitted with all development applications. Staff Finding: A landscape plan has not been submitted. A landscape plan pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(11) should be submitted as a condition of approval for Stream Margin Review. 12. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no lights directed toward the river or located down the slope; Staff Finding_ The applicant has stated that "no exterior lighting will be directed down slope or toward the river." This should be a condition of approval. 13. There has been accurate identification of wetland and riparian areas. Staff Finding_ Wetland and riparian areas have not been delineated on the submitted site plan. As a condition of approval, the Commission should require the applicant to accurately identify wetland and riparian areas pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(13). 8 STAFF COMMENTS: ADU Section 26.60.040, Standards Applicable to all Conditional Uses (A) The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located. Staff Finding The proposed development is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and standards of the AACP, and with the intent of the R -6 zone district. (B) The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Staff Finding_ The subject parcel is surrounded by multi- and single - family residential uses, and an ADU use is both consistent and compatible with the existing residential development in the immediate vicinity. (C) The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties. Staff Findina: The submitted drawings lack sufficient information to determine the size and design of the proposed structures. Consequently, it is difficult to truly assess these applicable impacts. As a condition of approval, Commission should require the applicant meet this standard. (D) There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools. Staff Findina: There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the proposed uses. See Engineering referral comments, attached as Exhibit B. (E) The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use. 9 Staff Finding, The applicant is not generating additional employees. Furthermore the applicant is providing a deed restricted housing unit in accordance with the Housing Authority's guidelines for resident occupied units. (F) The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all other applicable requirements of this title. Staff Finding The proposed conditional uses will comply with all additional standards imposed on it be the AACP. It is unknown whether or not the proposed development is in accordance with the Residential Design Standards. Planning and Zoning Commission should condition this approval on the applicant meeting the requirements in Section 26.58.040, Residential Design Standards. It should be noted that the Parks Department is continuing to encourage the applicant to consider granting or selling an easement across these lots for trail purposes (see attached referral comments from the Parks Department, Exhibit B). Section 26.40.090, Accessory Dwelling Units A. General Provisions 1) Accessory Dwelling units shall contain not less than three - hundred (300) square feet and no more than seven - hundred (700) square feet of net livable area. The unit shall be deed restricted, meeting the Housing Authority's guidelines for resident occupied units and shall be limited to rental periods of not less than six (6) months in duration. Owners of the principle residence shall have the right to place a qualified employee or employees of his or her choosing in the accessory Az v dwelling unit. One (1) parking space shall be provided on -site for each studio unit, and for each bedroom within a one or two- bedroom accessory dwelling unit. Staff Finding The applicant has not provided enough information for City Staff to determine the square footage of the Accessory Dwelling Unit, its density, or the location of the parking associated with the accessory dwelling unit. Planning and Zoning Commission should, as a condition of approval, require this ADU meet these standards, Section 26.40.090(A)(1) of the Code. (see Housing and Engineering referral comments, Exhibit B) 2) An attached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to all other dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. Staff Finding The dimensional requirements in the R -6 zone district are: 1 Minimum lot size = 6000 square feet. 11111 2 Minimum lot area per detached residential unit = 6000 square feet 3 Minimum lot width = 60 feet 4 Minimum front and rear yard = 10 feet minimum each & no more than 30 feet total. For accessory buildings, front yard = 15 minimum and rear yard = 5 feet minimum. 5 Each Side Yard = 15 feet with both being no more than 35 feet total. 6 Maximum site coverage = 25% 7 Maximum height for principle building = 25 feet Maximum height for accessory building = 21 feet on front 2/3 of lot, 12 feet on rear 1/3 of lot. 8 Minimum distance between detached buildings on lot = 5 feet. 9 No requirement for open space in this zone district. 10 Maximum allowable floor area= For lots 9,000- 15,000 square feet this zone district allows for 3,660 square feet of floor area plus 6 square feet of floor area for each additional 100 square feet of lot area up to a maximum of 4,020 square feet. This formula gives an allowable flor area of 3,935 square feet. This calculation is an estimate only and based on the total size of the lot. It does not take into account slope reductions, areas within the floodplain, or any potential FAR bonuses. The applicant is in compliance with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, & 9. From the information presented, it is unclear whether the applicant is in compliance with 6, 7, &10. 3) A detached accessory dwelling unit shall only be permitted on parcels that have secondary and /or alley access, exempting parcels with existing structures to be converted to detached accessory dwelling units, detached garages or carports where an accessory dwelling unit is proposed above, attached to, or contained within such detached garage or carport. Detached accessory dwelling units are prohibited within the R -15B zone district. Staff Findina: Applicant does not have an alley access. Applicant does, however, have a secondary access separate from the public right of way. Applicant is in compliance. 4) An attached accessory dwelling unit shall utilize alley access to the extent practical. Staff Finding Not applicable. A. Development Review Standards. 1) The proposed development is compatible and subordinate in character with the primary residence located on the property and with the development located within the neighborhood, and assuming year- around occupancy, shall not create a density pattern inconsistent with the established neighborhood. Staff Findina: Applicant is in compliance. 2) Where the proposed development varies from the dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the primary residence than the development in accord with dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements may be varied: a. Minimum front and rear yard setbacks b. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot. c. Maximum allowed floor area may be exceeded up to the bonus allowed for accessory dwelling units. d. The side yard setback shall be a minimum of three feet. e. The maximum height limits for detached accessory dwelling units in the R -6 zone district may be varied at the rear one -third (1/3) of the parcel, however, the maximum height of the structure shall not exceed eighteen (18) feet. On Landmark Designated parcels and within the Historic Overlay District the HPC shall have the ability to make height variations. f. Maximum allowable site coverage may be varied up to a maximum of five (5) percent, on Landmark Designated Parcels and within an Historic Overlay District the HPC shall have the ability to make such site coverage variations. g. In the case where the proposed detached accessory dwelling unit is located on a Landmark Designated Parcel or within an Historic Overlay District only HPC may make dimensional variations pursuant to the standards of Section 26.40.070(6) Staff Finding; The current site plan shows the applicant to be in compliance with the dimensional requirements listed 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, & 9 under A. General Provisions above. From the information presented, it is unclear whether the applicant is in compliance with 6, 7, &10 of this section. The applicants representative may ask for certain dimensional variances if the Commission finds the top -of -slope to be different from what the applicant is proposing. These variances would allow the applicant to maintain the same design proposed and merely 'push' the total development back further from the river or 'push' the two structures closer together. It is staffs position that the recommended top -of -slope does not create a hardship making such variances necessary, but staff is not opposed to the Commission granting dimensional variances for this development, as long as they meet standards a -e above. As a condition of approval, commission should require the applicant meet dimensional requirements approved. 3) The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Historic Preservation Committee may exempt existing nonconforming structures, being converted to a detached 12 accessory dwelling unit, from 26.40.070(B)(2)(a -g) provided that the nonconformity is not increased. Staff Finding: Not applicable. 4) Conditional use review shall be granted pursuant to Section 26.60.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses. Staff Finding: See staff findings for conditional use review. C. Bandit Units. Any bandit dwelling unit which can be demonstrated to have been in existence on or prior to November 1, 1988, and which complies with the requirements of this section may be legalized as an accessory dwelling unit, if it shall meet the health and safety requirements of the Uniform Building Code, as determined by the Chief Building Official. Staff Finding: Not applicable. D. GMQS/ Replacement Housing Credits. Accessory dwelling units shall not be used to obtain points in the affordable housing category of the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS). Only those units meeting the housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of approval of the housing designee and the standards of Section 26.100.090 may be used to obtain points in the affordable housing category. Accessory dwelling units also may not be used to meet the requirements of Title 20 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, "Residential Multi - Family Housing Replacement Program." Staff Finding: Not applicable. E. FAR for Accessory Dwelling Units. For the purposes of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose principle use is residential, the following shall apply: the allowable floor area for an above -grade attached accessory dwelling unit shall be excluded to a maximum of three - hundred -fifty (350) square feet of allowable floor area or fifty (50) percent of the size of the accessory dwelling unit, whichever is less. This floor area exclusion provision only applies to accessory dwelling units which are subject to review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to conditional use review and approval, Section 26.60.030 of this code, and the units must be deed restricted, registered with the housing office, and available for rental to an eligible working resident of Pitkin County. The owner retains the right to select the renter for the unit. Staff Finding; Not applicable. 13 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provided the applicant can adequately address the following conditions, Staff recommends Stream Margin (ESA) Review approval for the Frenzel Property, 329 Park Avenue, with conditions listed 1 -11 & 19, and Conditional Use approval with conditions listed 12 -19: 1. The final plat shall be amended to clearly show the revised building envelopes for the Lot with top -of -slope being elevation 7,935. The accessory dwelling unit shall be labeled and the deed restriction noted. Parking for the ADU will be delineated. A fifteen foot no development setback from the top -of -slope shall also be delineated parallel to this contour on the revised and recorded plat. 2. Before issuance of any permits, a current Site Improvement Survey certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in Colorado showing the location of the non - dedicated storm sewer, any utility easements, all existing vegetation, slope percentages, wetland and riparian vegetation areas, the Special Flood Hazard Area shall be submitted in accordance with Section 26.52.030(B)(5). 3. The applicant will continue to negotiate in good faith with the City of Aspen to grant a public access easement through the property along the Roaring Fork River for the purpose of establishing a recreational trail. Both the City of Aspen and the applicant are aware that the City is strongly encouraging this dedicated easement but cannot require it as a condition of approval. 4. The applicant shall submit site sections of the final architectural plans for the single - family residence and Accessory Dwelling Unit pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(13). The site sections shall be signed and stamped by a registered architect or engineer. The City Zoning Officer shall measure and determine height pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(10), Figure A, with the top -of -slope for the lot being elevation 7935, before issuance of any permits. 5. Pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(5), the applicant shall provide a plan addressing pollution or interference with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and /or sedimentation during construction before issuance of any permits. The applicant shall provide a plan to accommodate on- site drainage within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks before issuance of any permits. The applicant shall provide a plan addressing any pool /hot tub drainage before issuance of a building permit. 6. The applicant shall acquire approval from the appropriate utility companies for any proposed construction activity within utility easements prior to the issuance of any permits. 14 7. A landscape plan pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(11) of the Code showing only approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top -of -slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive shall be submitted before issuance of any permits. The building envelope boundary shall be approved prior to issuance of any building permits. No vegetation shall be manipulated outside the revised building envelope. Owner shall revegetate with only native plantings any soil disturbed on the site. A tree removal permit shall be required for the removal or relocation of trees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code. 1 8. Any development below the top -of -slope deemed essential shall only be approved by special review pursuant to Section 26.64.040(D) of the Code. 9. All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located within the no development setback or down the slope pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(12) 10. The applicant is strongly encouraged to submit a design for a storm sewer line and sewer outfall that accommodates historical drainage, and dedicate and record a storm sewer easement that allows the City to maintain and operate this storm sewer line, for review and approval by the Engineering Department. If owner does not dedicate this easement, owner shall include a note on the final plat indicating that the owner of the property is responsible for maintaining the historical drainage through the parcel. 11. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, owner shall complete and record a Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter Agreement. 12. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the owner shall: a. Verify with the Housing Office that the allowable floor area of the Accessory Dwelling Unit contains between 300 and 700 square feet; b. Verify with the Housing Office that the ADU will contain a kitchen having a minimum of a two- burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6 -cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer; C. Provide the Housing Office with a signed and recorded Deed Restriction, a copy of which must be obtained from the Housing Office; d. Clearly identify the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on building permit plans with the minimum one (1) off - street parking space provided. 13. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office and /or the Zoning Officer shall inspect the accessory dwelling unit for compliance 15 with all appropriate standards in Section 26.40.090 of the Code and any conditions of approval. 14. The driveway curb cut shall be no more than 10 feet in width if accommodating a single drive, no more than 18 feet in width if accommodating a double driveway. The common access and utility easement and the five (5) foot wide "pedestrian area" along the Park Avenue right -of -way shall both remain unobstructed from improvements. 15. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall submit development plans in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the R -6 zone district, and in accordance to Section 26.60.040(C) of the Code, unless otherwise approved by the Commission. 16. Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy, the owner shall relocate the existing aerial utility lines underground. Any pedestal or other ground equipment shall be installed on an easement provided by the property owner and not located within a public or private right -of -way. 17. The owner is encouraged to relocate the property's mailbox to the north side of the access easement, next to the other mailboxes, to better accommodate traffic movements on Park Avenue. 18. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall comply with all standards of Section 26.58 Residential Design Standards. 19. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Stream Margin (ESA) Review and Conditional Use for an ADU for the detached single - family residence proposed on the Frenzel property, 329 Park Avenue (City of Aspen Parcel No. 2737- 181 -58- 001), with the conditions outlined in the Community Development Department Memo dated February 26, 1997." EXHIBITS: "A" -Stream Margin Review & Conditional Use Application "B" - Referral Comments from Engineering, Parks , and Housing in A T ermiw -1?1 ,2u4-- .+ r r- r m �' Ifi i rj�4, 6-4R �Iunn�r G � A Aron 1.1', f " =(a' DENVER •ASPEN BOULDER• COLORADO SPRINGS DENVER TECH CENTER BILLINGS • BOISE CHEYENNE• JACKSON HOLE SALT LAKE CITY HAND DELIVERED David Hoffer, Esq. City Attorneys Office City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear David:: HOLLAND & HART LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 600 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611.1953 February 26, 1997 Re: Frenzel Stream Margin Review TELEPHONE (970) 925.3976 FACSIMILE (970) 9259367 CHARLES T. BRANDT ebrandtChollandhan.com Chris Bendon recommends to the Planning & Zoning Commission that the non - dedicated storm sewer traversing the Frenzel property be dedicated to the City of Aspen - see paragraph 10 under Staff Recommendations of his Memorandum dated February 12, 1997. This is not an appropriate recommendation as it amounts to an exaction which is not the result of the actions of the applicant, attributable to the development of the Frenzel property or required under the Stream Margin Review provisions of the Municipal Code. There is a history to this storm drain and it was the subject of a similar request by Ross Soderstrom at the time of the City's approval of the Bibbig lot line adjustment procedure a few months ago. Joe Edwards representing Dieter Bibbig was in contact with John Worcester at the time and the requirement of dedication was dropped. I enclose Joe Edwards' correspondence with John, together with the attachments to his letter for your information. Please advise Chris Bendon to delete the dedication recommendation and requirement. Thank you. Very truly yours, C •�'17. Charles T. Brandt for Holland & Hart LLP CTB:pal Enclosure cc: Otto N. Frenzel, III (Via Fax) ill Campbell (Via Fax) ti Christopher Bendon (Hand Delivered) 6. The applicant shall acquire approval from the appropriate utility companies for any proposed construction activity within utility easements prior to the issuance of any permits. 7. A landscape plan pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(11) of the Code showing only approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top -of -slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive shall be submitted before issuance of any permits. The building envelope boundary shall be approved prior to issuance of any building permits. No vegetation shall be manipulated outside the revised building envelope. Owner shall revegetate with only native plantings any soil disturbed on the site. A tree removal permit shall be required for the removal or relocation of trees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code. 8. Any development below the top -of -slope deemed essential shall only be approved by special review persuant to Section 26.64.040(D) of the Code. 9. All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located within the no development setback or down the slope pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(12) 10. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit a design for a storm sewer line and sewer outfall for review and approval by the Engineering Department that accommodates historical drainage. Owner shall pay for installation of such G storm sewer line and shall dedicate and record a storm sewer easement that allows the City j{ to maintain and operate this storm sewer line. 11. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, owner shall complete and record a Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter Agreement. 12. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS: Planning and Zoning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the Stream Margin (ESA) Review for the detached single - family residence proposed on the Frenzel property, 329 Park Avenue. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Stream Margin (ESA) Review for the detached single - family residence proposed on the Frenzel property, 329 Park Avenue (City of Aspen Parcel No. 2737 - 181 -58 -001), with the conditions outlined in the Community Development Department Memo dated February 12, 1997." 7 7. A landscape plan pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(11) of the Code showing only approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top -of -slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive shall be submitted before issuance of any permits. The building envelope boundary shall be approved prior to issuance of any building permits. No vegetation shall be manipulated outside the revised building envelope. Owner shall revegetate with only native plantings any soil disturbed on the site. A tree removal permit shall be required for the removal or relocation of trees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code. 8. Any development below the top -of -slope deemed essential shall only be approved by special review pursuant to Section 26.64.040(D) of the Code. 9. All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located within the no development setback or down the slope pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B)(12) 10. The applicant is strongly encouraged to submit a design for a storm sewer line and sewer outfall that accommodates historical drainage, and dedicate and record a storm sewer easement that allows the City to maintain and operate this storm sewer line, for review and approval by the Engineering Department. If owner does not dedicate this easement, owner shall include a note on the final plat indicating that the owner of the property is responsible for maintaining the historical drainage through the parcel. 11. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, owner shall complete and record a Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter Agreement. 12. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the owner shall a. Verify with the Housing Office that the allowable floor area of the Accessory Dwelling Unit contains between 300 and 700 square feet; b. Verify with the Housing Office that the ADU will contain a kitchen having a minimum of a two- burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6 -cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer; C. Provide the Housing Office with a signed and recorded Deed Restriction, a copy of which must be obtained from the Housing Office; d. Clearly identify the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on building permit plans with the minimum one (1) off - street parking space provided. 13. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office and /or the Zoning Officer shall inspect the accessory dwelling unit for compliance 15 David Hoefer, 02:32 PM 27/2/97, Frenzel storm Sewer X- Sender: davidho @commons.aspen.co.us Date: Thu, 27 Feb 199714:32:01 -0700 To: chrisb @aspen.co.us From: David Hoefer <davidho @aspen.co.us> Subject: Frenzel storm Sewer I understand that you spoke with John Worcester. I concur with John that the modified language would work well. If I can be of any help, please let me know. L rinted for Christopher Bendon <chrisb @aspen.co.us >_ 1 i P &Z: FRENZEL STREAM MARGIN REVIEW: BACKGROUND: NOT A SPEC HOUSE — THE FRENZELS OWN A CONDOMINIUM UNIT NEXT DOOR TO THIS PROPERTY. ARCHITECT BILL CAMPBELL MET WITH PLANNER BOB NEVINS ON SITE AND THE 79930' ELEVATION LINE WAS DETERMINED TO BE THE "TOP OF SLOPE ". BILL PROCEEDED WITH HIS DESIGN, FOOTPRINT AND THE STREAM MARGIN APPLICATION. ONLY WHEN THE STAFF MEMO WAS PREPARED RECOMMENDING 75935 AS THE TOP OF SLOPE DID WE REALIZE THERE IS AN ISSUE FOR P &Z TO RESOLVE. I. Major Issue is Top of Slope Determination A. Four elevations are suggested: 1. Applicant -- basically the 7,930 elevation line 2. Engineering Department -- 7,934 3. Parks Department -- 7,936 4. Staff recommends -- 7,935 B., The 5 feet difference between Staff's recommendation and the applicant, has the following effect. 1. It moves the building envelope to approximately 7,938 elevation line from the 7,936 elevation line. 2 It moves the building footprint from 7,938 elevation line to the 7,940/7,942 lines, 3. More importantly for the applicant's standpoint, it moves the house (building footprint) bank on this Lot 15 feet. C. 4. We think this is an arbitrary result because the application meets all of the criteria of Stream Margin Review, yet when the Top of Slope formula is attempted to be applied, it results in unfairness as to where the house is to be located on the lot. Illustration: 1. The most recent and perhaps only precedent is the Win - River application — Lots 1 and 2, Kastelic Subdivision. a. Bill Campbell is the architect on this project as well. The Top of Slope for these two lots was agreed to on site, not by the application of the TOS formula. 2. Here are the differences between Lot 2 and the Frenzel Lot based upon Top of Slope at 7,935 for Frenzel and 7,954 for Win- River. a. b. Distance from High Win -River Water Mark to Top of Slope Frenzel - (15' higher) 3 8' 53' Distance from 100 year flood plain to Top of Slope Win -River - 24' Frenzel - 45' (21' higher) C. Distance from 500 year flood plain to Top of Slope Win -River - 14- 16'/6' in elevation Frenzel - 38'/18' in elevation d. Elevation change from Top of Slope elevation line to the rear property line Win -River - Approximately 30 feet Frenzel - Approximately 7 feet 2 3. Conclusion — The Frenzel building envelope is dramatically pushed back by the application of the TOS formula. This is contrary to the precedent set by Kastelic. 4. Top of Slope Formula: "Top of Slope means a point or a line connecting at least three (3) points determined by the point of intersection of fifty -foot lines, one line being the level of the existing grade above the slope and the other line being the angle of the existing slope, both lines measured on a site section drawing." Where's the starting point? a. River's edge / where's the river? / 100 year flood plain / high water line. b. Must use an average for the slope over the 50' C. Presumption of the definition is that the stream -side property will have 50' of reasonably even slope. II. Trails: A. Review Bikeway Plan and Roaring Fork River Trail from Cooper Avenue to Herron Park from the Park's Department. B. Assuming the applicants top of slope elevation of 7,930 is accepted by P &Z, Applicant will grant an easement to the City of Aspen implementing the bikeway and pedestrian plans on condition that the similar connecting easements are obtained. k3 III. Roaring Fork Greenway Plan: A. Elevation 7,930 accommodates the following goal of the plan: Protect the River "from further development in order to preserve the attractive features of the River." 1. Riparian habitat and vegetation are preserved. 2. No landscaping of the bank is proposed. B. See Elevation Depiction of the Frenzel Lot. C. Note the upstream property location. IV. Storm Drain: A. Will dedicate to City if get a reasonable determination as we have requested V. Architectural Consideration: A. Bill Campbell's comments. VI. Review Stream Margin Criteria — Section 26.68.040. VII. SUMMARY: A. All criteria Stream Margin Review have been met or is a condition of approval. B. In order to accommodate the recommendation of the City Parks Department with respect to granting an easement for bike and pedestrian purposes, P &Z must acknowledge that the definition of "Top of Slope" is ambiguous and accept the applicant's requested Top of Slope at 7,930. 11 C. Recognizing 7930 is more consistent with the Win -River approval, doesn't penalize the applicant and maintains the Roaring Fork Greenway unlike the properties up- stream. HH:19374 vl 5 V) = LL W Z i > W ARC TANGENT CHORD CHORD BEARING BOULDER I I 80.47' 40.26' 80.44' N 73 °40'00•E WALL 9184 I I O o � 55.37• CD 2 r °. 20151 N 2-50'24-w D - o f0.07•. 76 \0 �1� / o 5 62.9 \ _ CE Al 20' W.C. 9184 / l S E ti _ lSb 1 ! 14 -' WEAK 7'-B* / a Ll ASPEN l 1 R jLn. ALL'S m Z w V •' t �- • 1 sPE J ING -; r/' ; 'rat �' `� BOU DER 6' CT 11 UC PR L. x � N ,c �D ' l 10/ F _ 1 NSE - -- / 46 '46 'W 5110 "W x'i .06' 17- LACS CTT I -- - 89'43'05- „r w LL • I. 3' h S x ST N \ c -- / PR ADD. lit \ 13' O I a TTNWD aj - — — 9 9. CTT PRUC 1 I I I 1 -- .� 1 l ✓�1 ` I 7TNWD SHE 1 n 6TN > j I D 22 C T ~ \ r t = i D , �• f GROVE �� d • 18 -CTTNW 1 A IT -�. SocJ / r H NE' 1' y Mal AXp, P_ 12 33 TM.. _' 2 -/i ",yPi2txE t / h / oW PZAe,77C i l , • • IV 150 ic /air y o % j % i /' iG� 1r /' % • 3 - i2 " ckTi?onTwc / / Y O.' 12 ACRE -_% i % � I I � it ��� 7/ yEL PA /NT NE (� O Or G/T I ti ! T t tr o S MOOD, w / LLGW P4A5T /C �� I NO Al0&UMENT FpUNO P /QED . hoc Sid U/ //VG _ a I ao&4'>C Sri/ EwUE C I•(OO 1 1 CUM r I L A E .4 w is - "° „ "m»`...Y,. -„K,b° " Alpine SUrvevs. Inc. *` � ^1j.rars an�i ood�s- n s:o...,