Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.apz.20151103
AGENDA Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING November 03, 2015 4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISIT II. ROLL CALL III. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public IV. MINUTES V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Lot 1 Pitkin Reserve Subdivision - Residential Design Variance VII. OTHER BUSINESS A. Citizens Academy Introduction - Michele Holder, City of Aspen Management Analyst VIII. BOARD REPORTS IX. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 20 Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legaJ notice (affi d avit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clari fications of applicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met. Revised April 2, 2014 1 RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOT 1 OF THE PITKIN RESERVE SUBDIVISION, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, THE PITKIN RESERVE, TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED ONE-SIXTH INTEREST IN LOT7, THE PITKIN RESERVE, ACCORDING TO THE SECOND AMENDED PLAT RECORDED JUNE 25TH, 1984 IN PLAT BOOK 16 AT PAGE 15, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel ID: 273501203012 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Aspen Ventures, LLC (Applicants), represented by Simon Elliot of CCY Architects, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve a Residential Design Standard Variance at Lot 1 of the Pitkin Reserve Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.410.020.D of the Land Use Code approval for a Residential Design Standard Variance may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Director recommended denial of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable review standards; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the request for a Residential Design Standard Variance that will permit the front entry door to be set back more than 10 feet from the front most wall of the structure, and as depicted in Exhibit 1. Planning and Zoning Commission have found the proposed design to meet the requirements of the review criteria for a Residential Design Standard variance as there are site-specific constraints due to where the building envelope may be located on the property and the entry door location is in context of the neighborhood standard. P1 VI.A. 2 Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded 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 3rd day of November, 2015. __________________________________ Ryan Walterscheid, Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: _________________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Exhibit 1: Approved plans for RDS variance (recorded) P2 VI.A. 8 8 A A NORTH B U I L D I N G E N V E L O P E P R O P E R T Y L I N E P I T K I N R ESE RVE R I O G R A N D E T R A I L R E D B U T T E M T N . RO A R I N G F OR K R I V E R 9 0 .0 0 ° 5 ' - 8 " 1 3 '-0 " R 2 9 '-0 " RELOCATED TRANSFORMER INTO EXISTING UTIL. EASEMENT 29' RADIUS AS REQ'D BY AFPDRELOCATED HYDRANT AS REQ'D BY AFPD RE L O C A T E D U T I L I T I E S 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1" = 20'-0"CCY14022 SITE PLAN ROOF PLAN A-110LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/21/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1. A R C H I T E C T U R A L E L E V A T I O N O F 100.-0" = SITE ELEVATION OF 7804'-6". RE : S U R V E Y . 2. P R O P E R T Y L I N E , B U I L D I N G E N V E L O P E , T O P O G R A P H Y , E T C . I N D I C A T E D H E R O N A R E T A K E N F R O M I M P R O V E M E N T S U R V E Y PREPARED BY HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING. ( S E E I M P R O V E M E N T A N D T O P O G R A P H I C S U R V E Y : L O T 1 , T H E P I T K I N R E S E R V E ) . 3. G . C . T O E S T A B L I S H P E R M A N E N T CONSTRUCTION BENCH MARK PRIOR TO C O M M E N C E M E N T O F W O R K . 4. V E R I F Y F I N A L L A Y O U T W I T H A R C H I T E C T PRIOR TO CLEARING AND EXCAVATION. 5. N O E X I S T I N G T R E E S O R S H R U B S O N S I T E M A Y B E R E M O V E D O R T R I M M E D F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N P U R P O S E S W I T H O U T PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE A R C H I T E C T . 6. L A Y O U T S I T E U T I L I T Y R U N S S O A S T O M I N I M I Z E D I S T U R B A N C E O F E X I S T I N G T R E E S A N D S H R U B S . V E R I F Y U T I L I T Y L A Y O U T W I T H A R C H I T E C T P R I O R T O C L E A R I N G A N D E X C A V A T I O N . 7. P R O T E C T A L L O N - S I T E V E G E T A T I O N N O T A P P R O V E D B Y T H E A R C H I T E C T F O R R E M O V A L O R T R I M M I N G F R O M D A M A GE DURING ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. 8. C O N T R A C T O R S H A L L O B T A I N T H E S E R V I C ES OF A PROFESSION AL SOILS ENGINEER W H O S H A L L M A K E A N O N S I T E I N V E S T I G A T I O N O F T H E E X I S T I N G S O I L S C O N D I T I O N S A F T E R T H E S T R U C T U R A L E X C A V A T I O N IS COMPLETE AND SHALL PREPARE A LETTER W I T H C O P I E S T O T H E A R C H I T E C T A N D STRUCTURAL ENGINEER DESCRIBING SOIL C O N D I T I O N S I N S U F F I C I E N T D E T A I L S U C H T H A T T H E F O U N D A T I O N D E S I G N I N D I C A T E D O N T H E D O C U M E N T S M A Y B E V E R I F I E D A S B E I N G A D E Q U A T E O R M A Y B E R E V I S E D A S N E C E S S A R Y B Y T H E S T R U C T U R A L E N G I N E E R . 9. L O C A T E A N D I N S T A L L F O U N D A T I O N D R A I N S , D R Y W E L L S A N D C A T C H B A S I N S E T C . P E R R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S A N D D E T A I L S O F S O I L S A N D C I V I L E N G I N E E R S . SI T E P L A N N O T E S 1" = 20'-0"SITE PLAN 1 ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION 100'-0"=SITE ELEVATION 7804'-6"ISSUE DATE ISSUED P3 VI.A. MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0"3 4 5 10 0 . 1 10 0 . A 121.A 10 6 . 1 T.O. DECK 113'-0" GA R A G E D O O R LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 5 A1 1/4" = 1'-0" GA R A G E D O O R E L E V A T I O N P4 VI.A. UP UP UP UP 3 C 4 5 A B MU D 10 4 ST O N E T I L E PW D 10 5 ST O N E T I L E GA R A G E 10 6 EP X P N T DO G WA S H TR A S H 10 7 EP X P N T 10 4 . 2 10 6 . 1 10 5 . 2 10 0 . 2 10 7 . 2 10 7 . 1 ENTRY PORCH 113 DU M B W A I T E R 10 4 . 4 10 4 . 3 ST O R A G E 100.1 10 4 . 1 10 5 . 1 PI T K I N W A Y GA R A G E A P R O N PR O P E R T Y L I N E M1 LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 5 A2 1/4" = 1'-0" GA R A G E P L A N P5 VI.A. UP UP DN UP 8 7 6 C 5 A B WA T E R FE A T U R E PL A N T E R B E N C H PL A N T E R OP E N T O B E L O W / S K Y L I G H T A B O V E EN T R Y 10 0 ST O N E T I L E AU T O C O U R T 10 0 . 2 EN T R Y P O R C H 11 3 ST A I R 10 8 10 4 . 4 PLANTER 10 0 . 1 S L O P E - 2 % 10 4 . 1 PI T K I N W A Y 2 6 ' - 9 1 / 2 " PR O P E R T Y L I N E 9 ' - 9 1 / 2 " . LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 5 A3 1/4" = 1'-0" EN T R Y D O O R P L A N EN T R Y D O O R CO V E R E D A R E A P6 VI.A. MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0" 7 6 4 5 T.O. DECK 113'-0" 10 0 . 1 10 8 . B 10 8 . A 10 0 . A EN T R Y D O O R TR A N S O M W I N D O W LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 5 A4 1/4" = 1'-0" EN T R Y D O O R E L E V A T I O N P7 VI.A. MA S T E R W I N G 96'-6" M3 STONE TILES CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) COR-TEN STEEL PANELS 01 0 . B 01 2 . A 10 2 . 2 12 3 . A M1 M2 MA I N L E V E L F . F . 100'-0" LO W E R L E V E L F . F . 89'-0" C F A B D COR-TEN STEEL PANELS ST O N E T I L E S ST E E L P A N E L S 01 6 . B G CEMENT COMPOSITE FACADE SYSTEM (e.g. SWISSPEARL) 11 0 . B T.O. DECK 113'-0" E 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1/4" = 1'-0"CCY14022 EAST/WEST ELEVATION A-210LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/21/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " WE S T E L E V A T I O N 1 / 4 1 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " EA S T E L E V A T I O N 1 / 4 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P8 VI.A. MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0" 8 7 6 3 4 5 10 0 . 1 11 2 . A 10 8 . B 10 8 . A 10 0 . A 121.A CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) ST E E L P A N E L S CO R - T E N S T E E L P A N E L S 10 6 . 1 /2A-211 CO R - T E N S T E E L P A N E L S & D O O R F. D . S T R O B E & C O N N E C T I O N T.O. DECK 113'-0"9'-0"12'-0" 9 ' - 0 " 1 2 ' - 0 " FR O N T D O O R & T R A M S O M GA R A G E D O O R 9' - 1 2 ' Z O N E MA I N L E V E L F . F . 10 0 ' - 0 " 3 2 12 1 . A ST O N E T I L E S / 1 A - 2 1 1 CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) 12 1 . 2 12 1 . B 12 2 . B CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) T. O . D E C K 11 3 ' - 0 " 9 ' - 0 " 1 2 ' - 0 " 9' - 1 2 ' Z O N E 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1/4" = 1'-0"CCY14022 NORTH ELEVATION A-211LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/21/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1/4" = 1'-0" NO R T H E L E V A T I O N E A S T 1 1/4" = 1'-0" NO R T H E L E V A T I O N W E S T 2ISSUEDATEISSUED P9 VI.A. MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0"LOWER LEVEL F.F.89'-0"8 7 6 3 4 5 2 01 0 . 2 00 7 . 2 00 3 . 2 00 1 . 1 11 4 . 1 11 0 . 2 016.A CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) ST O N E T I L E S CO R - T E N S T E E L P A N E L S 110.A 00 7 . A 01 0 . A 00 9 . A / 2 A - 2 1 2 10 2 . 1 10 1 . 1 CEMENT COMPOSITE FACADE SYSTEM (e.g. SWISSPEARL) CO R - T E N S T E E L P A N E L S T.O. DECK 113'-0" 01 6 . 2 00 4 . a MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0"LOWER LEVEL F.F.89'-0"MASTER WING 96'-6" 1 2 /1A-212 HVAC INTAKE 12 3 . 2 12 2 . A 12 0 . A AR C H I T E C T U R A L C O N C R E T E AR C H I T E C T U R A L C O N C R E T E CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) T.O. DECK 113'-0"0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1/4" = 1'-0"CCY14022 SOUTH ELEVATION A-212LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/21/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1/4" = 1'-0" SO U T H E L E V A T I O N E A S T 1 1/4" = 1'-0" SO U T H E L E V A T I O N W E S T 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P10 VI.A. EN T R Y D O O R TR A N S O M W I N D O W GA R A G E D O O R LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 5 A5 3/32" = 1'-0" NO R T H E L E V A T I O N - O V E R A L L 1 P11 VI.A. LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 5 A6 P12 VI.A. LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 5 A7 P13 VI.A. Page 1 of 6 MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Hillary Seminick, Planner Technician THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director RE: Lot 1 Pitkin Reserve Subdivision – RDS Variance Request MEETING DATE: November 3, 2015 APPLICANT/OWNERS: Aspen Ventures, LLC 6605 Forestshire Drive Dallas, TX 75230 214.580.3704 REPRESENTATIVE: Simon Elliot, CCY Architects LOCATION: Lot 1, Pitkin Reserve Subdivision CURRENT ZONING & USE: Low-Density Residential (R-30) zone district with a Planned Development overlay; vacant lot PROPOSED LAND USE: Single-family residence SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a Residential Design Standard variance that will permit the entry door to be recessed more than ten feet from the front most wall of the structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the applicants’ request for a residential design standard to permit the entry door to be located more than 10 feet behind the front-most wall of the structure. Figure A: Image of subject property, looking north from behind an existing utility towards Pitkin Way P14 VI.A. Page 2 of 6 LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval: Variance from the Residential Design Standard pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020.D.1(a), which 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. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight (8) feet. Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority for this request. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND: The subject property is located in the R-30 zone district, and is Lot 1 of the Pitkin Reserve Subdivision and Planned Development. This property is located outside of the Aspen Infill Area, on the border of the Pitkin County/Aspen City limits. Lot 1 is situated on Pitkin Way, a private road and the property abuts the Rio Grande Trail. Lot 1 is vacant and has not been previously developed. Pitkin Reserve Subdivision and Planned Development was approved by Ordinance No. 3, 1982. Pitkin Reserve PD includes 26 acres of area, 6 fee simple lots, one common lot and an open space lot. The area also includes the Rio Grande right of way and the Rio Grande path. The approvals, which have been amended over time, included the “Green Belt Line”, a boundary intended to protect the Rio Grande corridor, shown in Figure C. The area below the Greenbelt Line was required to be maintained in a natural state. The Greenbelt Line has since been removed from the plat and replaced with building envelopes. The City Attorney has been consulted in the matter and determined that the intent of the Greenbelt Line is still in effect and no development, nor building envelope, may be located below the Greenbelt Line. This has resulted in a site-specific condition where the building envelopes are in close proximity to Pitkin Way. Other properties within Pitkin Reserve are not as constrained with regards to building envelope location as the subject property. Existing residences are set back from the front lot line between 12 and 24 feet while the principal, front most wall of these structures range between 27 and 44 feet as shown in Figure D. Figure B: Site Location Map, indicated by highlighted parcel P15 VI.A. Page 3 of 6 Figure C. First Amended Plat, Pitkin Reserve Figure D. Neighborhood Block Plan, Sheet A0 P16 VI.A. Page 4 of 6 PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant requests a variance to allow for the entry door to be set back 20 feet from the front most wall of the structure as shown in Figures E and F. Full detail of the entry door and additional perspectives have been provided by the applicant and provided in Exhibit C. STAFF COMMENTS: The purpose of this Residential Design Standard is to have a human-scale entry with a clear relationship to the street. With the intent of this standard in mind, Staff has reviewed the request against the RDS variance review criteria. The Code states that the request for an RDS variance must meet one of the following criteria. 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 director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. The Greenbelt Line prohibits development below the Line to afford protection to the Rio Grande corridor. Additionally, there is a utility easement that parallels the southeast property line. Both factors have created a site-specific condition resulting in a building envelope that is nearly flush with the front lot line and Pitkin Way. The relationship of the building envelope with Pitkin Way is depicted in Figure G. Figure F. Excerpt from Perspective, A6 Figure E. Excerpt from Entry Door Plan, Sheet A-3 P17 VI.A. Page 5 of 6 Due to the site-specific constraint at the subject property, the Code requires the door to be located 15 feet from the front lot line and Pitkin Way. This would result in a condition where the entry is in close proximity to a street. As mentioned in Project Location and Background, the front most wall location of existing structures range between 27 and 44 feet. The proposed location of the entry door, 25 feet from edge of pavement, is consistent within the context of the neighborhood. Staff finds the entry door location is in context with the neighborhood standard. There are site- specific constraints associated with this parcel that warrant the granting of this variance for the entry door location. Staff finds both criterion 26.410.020.D.2(a) and (b) met. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the applicants’ request for a Residential Design Standard variance. Figure G. Excerpt from First Amended Plat, Lot 1 P18 VI.A. Page 6 of 6 RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): If the Planning and Zoning Commission chooses to approve the applicant’s request, the following motion may be used: “I move to approve the request for a variance from the Residential Design Standard as noted in Resolution ___, Series of 2015.” If the request is not approved, the resolution will need to be modified. Attachments: Exhibit A – Residential Design Standard Variance Criteria Exhibit B – Application Exhibit C – Application Graphics Exhibit D – Public Notice P19 VI.A. 1 Exhibit B Review Criteria 26.410.020.D. Variances. 2. 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 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 director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b). Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Response: The proposed entry door is located 20 feet from the front most wall of the structure. The front most wall of the proposed structure is five feet from the front lot line and the entry door is recessed 20 feet behind this wall. The entry door is setback from the front lot line and Pitkin Way approximately 25 feet. The RDS standard requires the door to be located 15 feet from the front lot line and Pitkin Way. Portions of existing structures within Pitkin Reserve are recessed from the front lot line between 12 and 24 feet while the principal, front most wall of these structures range between 27 and 44 feet as shown in Exhibit C, Neighborhood Block Plan A0. If a variance were not granted, the front entry would be very close to the edge of pavement relative to other structures in Pitkin Reserve. Permitting the entry door placement in the proposed location, 25 feet from the edge of pavement, would speak to the neighborhood context where the foremost walls of residences are between 27 and 44 feet from the road. The approvals for Pitkin Reserve, which have been amended over time, included the Greenbelt Line, a boundary intended to protect the Rio Grande corridor. Condition VI.A. of the Subdivision Agreement (Reception No. 260662) requires the area below the Greenbelt Line shall be maintained in a natural state. The Greenbelt Line has since been removed from the plat and replaced with building envelopes. The City Attorney has been consulted in the matter and determined that the intent of the Greenbelt Line is still in effect and no development, nor building envelope, may be located below the Greenbelt P20 VI.A. 2 Line. Additionally, there is a utility easement that parallels the southeast property line. The location of the building envelope, Greenbelt Line and utility easement are shown on Figure 4. Both factors have created a site-specific condition where the building envelopes are in close proximity to Pitkin Way. Staff finds the entry door location is in context with the neighborhood standard, and finds the criterion 26.410.020.D.2.a to be met. There are site-specific constraints associated with this parcel that warrant the granting of this variance for the entry door location. Staff finds criterion 26.410.020.D.2.b met. P21 VI.A. PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP 10/26/2015 P22 VI.A. RI O G R A N D E TR A I L 1 4 ' - 0 " 1 2 ' - 0 " 16'-0" 24'-0" 4 4 ' - 0 " 4 3 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 0 " 2 7 ' - 0 " 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 1" = 50'-0"Author14022 NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK PLAN A0LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/26/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO Checker 1" = 50'-0"NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK PLANNORTHISSUEDATEISSUED P23 VI.A. 10/26/15 SOUTH PANORAMA NORTH PANORAMA P 2 4 V I . A . 10/26/15 64 PITKIN WAY P 2 5 V I . A . 10/26/15 58 PITKIN WAY P 2 6 V I . A . 10/26/15 52 PITKIN WAY P 2 7 V I . A . 10/26/15 44 PITKIN WAY P 2 8 V I . A . P29 V I . A . P 3 0 V I . A . 8 8 A A NORTH B U I L D I N G E N V E L O P E P R O P E R T Y L I N E P I T K I N R ESE RVE R I O G R A N D E T R A I L R E D B U T T E M T N . RO A R I N G F OR K R I V E R 9 0 .0 0 ° 5 ' - 8 " 1 3 '-0 " R 2 9 '-0 " RELOCATED TRANSFORMER INTO EXISTING UTIL. EASEMENT 29' RADIUS AS REQ'D BY AFPDRELOCATED HYDRANT AS REQ'D BY AFPD RE L O C A T E D U T I L I T I E S 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1" = 20'-0"CCY14022 SITE PLAN ROOF PLAN A-110LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/26/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1. A R C H I T E C T U R A L E L E V A T I O N O F 100.-0" = SITE ELEVATION OF 7804'-6". RE : S U R V E Y . 2. P R O P E R T Y L I N E , B U I L D I N G E N V E L O P E , T O P O G R A P H Y , E T C . I N D I C A T E D H E R O N A R E T A K E N F R O M I M P R O V E M E N T S U R V E Y PREPARED BY HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING. ( S E E I M P R O V E M E N T A N D T O P O G R A P H I C S U R V E Y : L O T 1 , T H E P I T K I N R E S E R V E ) . 3. G . C . T O E S T A B L I S H P E R M A N E N T CONSTRUCTION BENCH MARK PRIOR TO C O M M E N C E M E N T O F W O R K . 4. V E R I F Y F I N A L L A Y O U T W I T H A R C H I T E C T PRIOR TO CLEARING AND EXCAVATION. 5. N O E X I S T I N G T R E E S O R S H R U B S O N S I T E M A Y B E R E M O V E D O R T R I M M E D F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N P U R P O S E S W I T H O U T PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE A R C H I T E C T . 6. L A Y O U T S I T E U T I L I T Y R U N S S O A S T O M I N I M I Z E D I S T U R B A N C E O F E X I S T I N G T R E E S A N D S H R U B S . V E R I F Y U T I L I T Y L A Y O U T W I T H A R C H I T E C T P R I O R T O C L E A R I N G A N D E X C A V A T I O N . 7. P R O T E C T A L L O N - S I T E V E G E T A T I O N N O T A P P R O V E D B Y T H E A R C H I T E C T F O R R E M O V A L O R T R I M M I N G F R O M D A M A GE DURING ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. 8. C O N T R A C T O R S H A L L O B T A I N T H E S E R V I C ES OF A PROFESSION AL SOILS ENGINEER W H O S H A L L M A K E A N O N S I T E I N V E S T I G A T I O N O F T H E E X I S T I N G S O I L S C O N D I T I O N S A F T E R T H E S T R U C T U R A L E X C A V A T I O N IS COMPLETE AND SHALL PREPARE A LETTER W I T H C O P I E S T O T H E A R C H I T E C T A N D STRUCTURAL ENGINEER DESCRIBING SOIL C O N D I T I O N S I N S U F F I C I E N T D E T A I L S U C H T H A T T H E F O U N D A T I O N D E S I G N I N D I C A T E D O N T H E D O C U M E N T S M A Y B E V E R I F I E D A S B E I N G A D E Q U A T E O R M A Y B E R E V I S E D A S N E C E S S A R Y B Y T H E S T R U C T U R A L E N G I N E E R . 9. L O C A T E A N D I N S T A L L F O U N D A T I O N D R A I N S , D R Y W E L L S A N D C A T C H B A S I N S E T C . P E R R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S A N D D E T A I L S O F S O I L S A N D C I V I L E N G I N E E R S . SI T E P L A N N O T E S 1" = 20'-0"SITE PLAN 1 ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION 100'-0"=SITE ELEVATION 7804'-6"ISSUE DATE ISSUED P31 VI.A. UP UP DN UP 8 7 6 C 5 A B WA T E R FE A T U R E PL A N T E R B E N C H PL A N T E R OP E N T O B E L O W / S K Y L I G H T A B O V E EN T R Y 10 0 ST O N E T I L E AU T O C O U R T 10 0 . 2 EN T R Y P O R C H 11 3 ST A I R 10 8 10 4 . 4 PLANTER 10 0 . 1 S L O P E - 2 % 10 4 . 1 PI T K I N W A Y 2 6 ' - 9 1 / 2 " PR O P E R T Y L I N E 9 ' - 9 1 / 2 " . LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 5 A1 1/4" = 1'-0" EN T R Y D O O R P L A N EN T R Y D O O R CO V E R E D A R E A P32 VI.A. MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0" 7 6 4 5 T.O. DECK 113'-0" 10 0 . 1 10 8 . B 10 8 . A 10 0 . A EN T R Y D O O R TR A N S O M W I N D O W LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 5 A3 1/4" = 1'-0" EN T R Y D O O R E L E V A T I O N P33 VI.A. EN T R Y D O O R TR A N S O M W I N D O W LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 5 A4 3/32" = 1'-0" NO R T H E L E V A T I O N - O V E R A L L 1 P34 VI.A. LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 5 A5 P35 VI.A. LO T 1 P I T K I N R E S E R V E 10 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 5 A6 P36 VI.A. MA S T E R W I N G 96'-6" M3 STONE TILES CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) COR-TEN STEEL PANELS 01 0 . B 01 2 . A 10 2 . 2 12 3 . A M1 M2 MA I N L E V E L F . F . 100'-0" LO W E R L E V E L F . F . 89'-0" C F A B D COR-TEN STEEL PANELS ST O N E T I L E S ST E E L P A N E L S 01 6 . B G CEMENT COMPOSITE FACADE SYSTEM (e.g. SWISSPEARL) 11 0 . B T.O. DECK 113'-0" E 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1/4" = 1'-0"CCY14022 EAST/WEST ELEVATION A-210LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/26/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " WE S T E L E V A T I O N 1 / 4 1 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " EA S T E L E V A T I O N 1 / 4 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P37 VI.A. MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0" 8 7 6 3 4 5 10 0 . 1 11 2 . A 10 8 . B 10 8 . A 10 0 . A 121.A CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) ST E E L P A N E L S CO R - T E N S T E E L P A N E L S 10 6 . 1 /2A-211 F. D . S T R O B E & C O N N E C T I O N T.O. DECK 113'-0"9'-0"12'-0" 9 ' - 0 " 1 2 ' - 0 " FR O N T D O O R & T R A M S O M GA R A G E D O O R 9' - 1 2 ' Z O N E MA I N L E V E L F . F . 10 0 ' - 0 " 3 2 12 1 . A ST O N E T I L E S / 1 A - 2 1 1 CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) 12 1 . 2 12 1 . B 12 2 . B CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) T. O . D E C K 11 3 ' - 0 " 9 ' - 0 " 1 2 ' - 0 " 9' - 1 2 ' Z O N E 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1/4" = 1'-0"CCY14022 NORTH ELEVATION A-211LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/26/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1/4" = 1'-0" NO R T H E L E V A T I O N E A S T 1 1/4" = 1'-0" NO R T H E L E V A T I O N W E S T 2ISSUEDATEISSUED P38 VI.A. MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0"LOWER LEVEL F.F.89'-0"8 7 6 3 4 5 2 01 0 . 2 00 7 . 2 00 3 . 2 00 1 . 1 11 4 . 1 11 0 . 2 016.A CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) ST O N E T I L E S CO R - T E N S T E E L P A N E L S 110.A 00 7 . A 01 0 . A 00 9 . A / 2 A - 2 1 2 10 2 . 1 10 1 . 1 CEMENT COMPOSITE FACADE SYSTEM (e.g. SWISSPEARL) CO R - T E N S T E E L P A N E L S T.O. DECK 113'-0" 01 6 . 2 00 4 . a MAIN LEVEL F.F.100'-0"LOWER LEVEL F.F.89'-0"MASTER WING 96'-6" 1 2 /1A-212 HVAC INTAKE 12 3 . 2 12 2 . A 12 0 . A AR C H I T E C T U R A L C O N C R E T E AR C H I T E C T U R A L C O N C R E T E CE M E N T C O M P O S I T E F A C A D E SY S T E M ( e . g . S W I S S P E A R L ) T.O. DECK 113'-0"0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1/4" = 1'-0"CCY14022 SOUTH ELEVATION A-212LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE VARIANCE REQUEST10/26/2015LOT 1 PITKIN RESERVE ASPEN, CO CCY 1/4" = 1'-0" SO U T H E L E V A T I O N E A S T 1 1/4" = 1'-0" SO U T H E L E V A T I O N W E S T 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P39 VI.A. ASLU Insubstantial PD/RDS Lot 1, Pitkin Reserve Parcel ID: 2735-014-07-001 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Amy Simon, 970.429.2758 DATE: 6/22/15 PROJECT: Lot 1, Pitkin Reserve PD REPRESENTATIVE: Simon Elliot, selliot@ccyarchitects.com REQUEST: Building Envelope Adjustment and Residential Design Standards Variances DESCRIPTION: The prospective applicant would like to alter the boundaries of the building envelope on Lot 1 of the Pitkin Reserve PD. The property is currently vacant. The lot is part of a Planned Development (PD) and PD Amendment approval is required. To qualify for administrative approval, the overall size of the proposed new building envelope must be the same as originally approved and allowed floor area will not change. There should not be a significant impact on native vegetation. The draft plat must include different types of hatching to clearly indicate the existing and the proposed building envelopes. The applicant also wishes to request Administrative approval of variances to Residential Design Standards. The following two criteria are used in determining the appropriateness of a variance, which must: a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. If an Administrative RDS variance is not approved, the applicant must revise the project or request a hearing at the Planning and Zoning Commission. Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use App: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/2013%20land%20use%20app%20form.p df Land Use Code: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26-Land-Use-Code/ Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410.020.D Residential Design Standards Variances 26.445.100 A. Planned Development –Insubstantial Amendment P40 VI.A. 2 Review by: Staff for completeness Review agencies for compliance Staff for determination P&Z for review of RDS variances if needed Public Hearing: No (unless RDS is reviewed by P&Z) Planning Fees: $1,300 for 4 hours of staff time. Any unbilled portion of this deposit will be refunded at the conclusion of the case. Additional staff hours, if needed, will be billed at $325 per hour. Referrals: $265 for Engineering, billed hourly thereafter $650 for Parks, flat fee Total Deposit: $2,215 To apply, submit one printed copy of the following information: Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement. Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application. Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of Colorado. A proposed plat representing the new building envelope. HOA Compliance form (Attached). A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property. An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Once the application has been deemed complete by Planning Staff, please submit: Total deposit for review of the application. P41 VI.A. 3 A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format. Additional printed copies TBD. 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. P42 VI.A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Land Use Review Fee Policy The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City departments reviewing the application (referral departments) will also be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative – meaning an application with multiple flat fees must pay the sum of those flat fees. Flat fees are not refundable. A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Deposit amounts may be reduced if, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates. A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-application conference by the case planner. Hourly billing shall still apply. All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee. The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the processing of a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the applicant’s request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the applicant with no additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval. Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final, and recordation of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purposes of billing. Upon conceptual approval all billing shall be reconciled and all past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final application submission. Upon final approval all billing shall again be reconciled prior to the Director accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation. The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30 or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 or more days past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.75% per month. An unpaid invoice of 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information is public domain. All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already accepted, an unpaid invoice of 90 or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance of a stop work order until full payment is made. The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties. -DQXDU\ &LW\RI$VSHQ_6*DOHQD6W_ P43 VI.A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Property Owner (“I”): Phone No.: Email: Address of Property: (subject of application) Billing Address: (send bills here) 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. $___________ deposit for _______ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325 per hour. $___________ deposit for ______ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $25 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: Chris Bendon Community Development Director Name: Title: ____ City Use: Fees Due: $___________ Received: $____________ -DQXDU\ &LW\RI$VSHQ_6*DOHQD6W_ Aspen Ventures, LLC Jack Lafield 214.580.3704 jack@caimanenergy.com Lot#1 Pitkin Reserve 6605 Forestshire Dr. Dallas, TX 75230 650 Parks 0 Select Dept 0 Select Dept 0 Select Review 1,300 4 265 1 2215 P44 VI.A. P45 VI.A. P46 VI.A. P47 VI.A. Aspen Ventures, LLC 6605 Forestshire Dr. Dallas, TX 75230 August 27, 2015 City of Aspen Community Development Department Planning and Zoning 130 S. Galena Street 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Lot #1 Pitkin Reserve, Building Envelope Adjustment and RDS Variances. To whom it may concern, I, Jack Lafield, of Aspen Ventures, LLC, (6605 Forestshire Drive, Dallas, Texas, 75230 Tel # 214. 580.3704) authorize CCY Architects (228 Midland Ave, P.O Box 529 Basalt, Colorado 81621 Tel#970.927.4925) to act on our behalf with regard to the planning application pertaining to Lot 1 Pitkin Reserve. Respectfully, Jack Lafield Aspen Ventures, LLC P48 VI.A. P49 VI.A. P 5 0 V I . A . September , 2015 City of Aspen Community Development Department Planning and Zoning 130 S. Galena Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO81611 Re: Lot #1 Pitkin Reserve, Building Envelope Adjustment and Variance Request To whom it may concern, Our client, Aspen Ventures, LLC is requesting a building envelope adjustment at the above referenced property. The requested adjustment is graphically described in the attached “Proposed Building Envelope Map” prepared by High Country Engineering. The proposed building envelope has the same square foot area as the original building envelope. The building envelope modifications are being requested for the following reasons. The northeast side of the property (bordering Pitkin Way) will require shoring and stabilization for the excavation. The adjusted envelope is concurrent with the edge of an access and utility easement on the northeast side of the property; this allows the greatest flexibility for the shoring system. On the southeast side the envelope has been adjusted to allow a little more space for construction access. The southeast line does not interfere with existing, mature, vegetation on this end of the property. The envelope line on the northwest side of the property has been moved to the southeast to maintain the building envelope area (square footage). Adjusting the northwest line has the added benefit of protecting a mature group of scrub oaks; it also pulls the building envelope further away from the Rio Grande Trail. In addition, we are requesting variances to the following two sections of the Residential Design Standards: 26.410.040.C.1.b (garage doors) and 26.410.040.D.a (entry door). The property is not located in the Aspen infill area. In addition, the property is accessed from a private road, Pitkin Way. The garage door is graphically described in the attached sheets A1 and A2. We are requesting a variance to section 26.410.040.c.1.b; “a double stall door shall be designed to appear like two single stall doors”. The garage door at this project is designed to be flush to the adjacent walls and to appear as a wall and not a door, or doors. In addition, a double garage door is in context and appropriate considering the adjacent structures. Of the four other houses on this private road two of them have double garage doors (see attached neighborhood context photographs). The entry door is graphically described in the attached sheet A3. Per section 26.410.040.D.a, the entry door is facing the street, visible from the street, and only 8’-0” tall. We request only a variance to the distance from the “front-most wall of the building”. We request this variance on the basis that site constraints (steepness and narrowness of the site) require that the garage be located close to the street. However, the entry door should be kept further from the street for comfort and safety. Although this property is not governed by setbacks, the entry door and primary façade are located approximately 25 feet from the property line as would be required in the R30 zone district; the garage, the forward most face of the building, must be located closer to the road. In addition, creating a buffer between the road and the entry door is an appropriate design considering the pattern of development/context of the neighborhood (see attached neighborhood context photographs). Respectfully, Simon Elliot, AIA CCY Architects P51 VI.A. PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP 09/09/2015 P52 VI.A. P53 VI.A. P54 VI.A. P 5 5 V I . A . P 5 6 V I . A . P57 VI.A. P58 VI.A.