HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20231017AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION
October 17, 2023
4:30 PM, Pearl Pass Meeting Room
3rd Floor, 427 Rio Grande Pl,
Aspen
I.ROLL CALL
II.COMMENTS
III.MINUTES
III.A Draft Minutes 9-19-23
IV.DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
V.PUBLIC HEARINGS
V.A Resolution #XX, Series of 2023 - 360 Lake Ave, Hallam Lake Bluff Review and
Residential Design Standard Variation Review
VI.OTHER BUSINESS
VII.BOARD REPORTS
VIII.ADJOURN
minutes.p&z.20230919_DRAFT1.pdf
Memo_360 Lake Ave_Hallam Lake Bluff.RDS.pdf
P&Z Resolution #XX, Series 2023_360 Lake Ave - Alternative A.pdf
P&Z Resolution #XX, Series 2023_360 Lake Ave - Alternative B.pdf
Exhibit A - Hallam Lake Bluff Review Critera.pdf
Exhibit B - RDS Review Criteria.pdf
Exhibit C - Application.pdf
TYPICAL PROCEEDING FORMAT FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS
1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legal notice
(affidavit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of
staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clarifications of applicant 7) Public
comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close
public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal/clarification of evidence presented by
applicant and public comment 11) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding.
1
1
Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission
and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among
commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the
discussion and motion includes what criteria are met or not met Revised January 9, 2021
2
2
REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2023
Commissioners in attendance: Maryann Pitt, Tracy Sutton, Marcus Blue, Eric Knight, Ken Canfield, Jason
Suazo, Tom Gorman, Christine Benedetti, and Teraissa McGovern.
Staff present:
Jeff Barnhill, Planner I
Amy Simon, Planning Director
Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney
Luisa Berne, Assistant City Attorney
Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None.
STAFF COMMENTS: Amy Simon told the Board that the October 3rd meeting is cancelled.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: None.
MINUTES: Mr. Gorman mo�oned to approve the minutes for August 15th, 2023, with amendments,
and the mo�on was seconded by Ms. Suton. Ms. McGovern asked for a roll call: Mr. Blue, yes; Mr.
Knight, yes; Mr. Canfield abstained, Mr. Suazo, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Ms. Benede�, yes; Ms. McGovern,
yes; for a total of six (6) in favor – zero (0) not in favor. The mo�on passed.
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: No Conflicts.
SUBMISSION OF PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Johnson said that notice was provided.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: 809 South Aspen Street - Shadow Mountain Village - 8040 Greenline Review
Resolution #7
Mr. Barnhill introduced himself and explained what an 8040 Greenline review is.
Applicant Presenta�on: Chris Bendon - Bendon Adams
Mr. Bendon introduced himself and Karen Hartman, President of the HOA. He said the genesis of the
8040 review started in the 70‘s as a review of development at that elevation because water pressure
started to become an issue and it’s also the elevation where you can start seeing things from town.
Related work in the public ROW also in the application. He explained the location and the project to the
board. He said there have been lots of changes in the neighborhood with Lift 1A and Gorsuch House
surrounding the property.
Ms. Hartman thanked the Board and gave some history of the property. She said it has been a long
process, but she is happy to be at this point.
Mr. Bendon said there have been 3 administrative 8040 approvals by staff and finally they said that a full
application needed to be presented. There are a lot of little things that required them to be here. A lot
of Reconfiguration of accessways and stairs along with improvements to the landscape, drainage,
resurfacing of parking area, tree removals, updating the AC system, rebuilding decks and, updating the
property overall. There is a tram that is not being touched. There will be improvements to public areas
like the pool, fireplace, and patio area. The landscape plan includes 17 new trees. There are
improvements in the public right of way, the stairs going up to a property will be redeveloped.
3
REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2023
They would like to make one change to the resolution, the wording to section 1 in the lists of conditions,
the wording says, “conditions including but not limited to”. They would rather it say Parks or
Engineering department has the following conditions or include an additional bullet point under each list
that says the additional condition or requirement.
Mr. Barnhill said the city agrees with that.
Mr. Gorman asked if the Engineering department was comfortable with the work done to stabilize the
site. Mr. Barnhill said that a lot of that work was done under one of the administrative approvals and
Engineering was ok with that.
Mr. Gorman asked if the public gains a benefit from the stairs since they are in the public right of way?
Chris said their big parameter was not increasing the square footage of stuff in the Right of way. He said
the city requires the HOA insurance policy to extend to the stairs.
Ms. Sutton asked if that pertains to the deck as well and if the deck is open to the public. Mr. Bendon
said yes that does pertain to the deck and the deck is technically available for public access but will be
partly on private property. He said the improvements will look like private property.
Ms. Sutton asked if the city is not responsible for anyone going up the hill on the sidewalk. Ms. Johnson
cautioned against that question as it is not relevant to this board.
Ms. McGovern asked if there was an accessibility review required since the sidewalk is in the public right
of way, is not accessible, and if it is required to be accessible? Ms. Johnson said that will be part of the
building permit review.
Mr. Suazo asked about the parking lot right of way, he said there were three to four parking spots used
but were taken out of the square footage. He asked if that will be repaved. Mr. Bendon said they are
repaving that, but he cannot remember how Engineering figured that out.
Ms. Pitt asked if the trees that would be taken out will be replaced. Mr. Bendon said yes. Ms. Johnson
said that is a condition of Parks code.
Staff Presenta�on: Jeff Barnhill – Planner I
Mr. Barnhill presented on the 809 S Aspen Greenline review. He said the current zoning is lodge. He
gave the history of approvals for the property. He showed the criteria for the 8040 Greenline review
and the conditions of approval that are in the resolution. When staff was reviewing the review criteria,
they found most of the criteria met or not applicable, one thing that helped the property is it’s largely
developed. The increased impervious area created and the fact that the property is in a mudflow zone is
what pushed the request into P&Z’s hands rather than administrative approvals. Staff recommends P&Z
approve the requested land use review with the conditions outlined.
Mr. Blue asked what the use of the tram is. Ms. Hartman said it is mainly used to transport people with
luggage to the upper units.
Mr. Suazo said he is confused about the right of way and what their purview is. Specifically, can they
revoke the encroachment licenses. Ms. Johnson said the city does issue revocable permanent
encroachment licenses, there are some terms in those licenses that dictate when or if they can revoke it
and/or require removal of certain items in the right of way. It is a common practice to use those to
4
REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2023
allow certain things to be placed in the right of way. She doesn’t think P&Z has much preview over the
terms of the encroachment permit and she thinks their review is limited to the 8040 Greenline criteria
set forth by Mr. Barnhill.
Ms. McGovern said their purview is not necessarily about public right of way, their relevant criteria is for
the 8040 Greenline review.
Ms. Johnson said they are looking at this for 8040 purposes, but it does go into the ROW. It must comply
with 8040 review whether it is in the ROW or not. She told the board they are looking at development
conditions of slope, ground stability, and things that take the right of way issue out of it. They are
looking at what is being put there and evaluating what they want to put in that area with the conditions
as we see them.
Mr. Suazo said it was mentioned that there is no ADA access and it’s not improving the property and not
everyone can use it so its not public per say, it’s not really useful for anyone but the HOA. Ms. Johnson
said that does not necessarily run afoul of their criteria.
They discussed conditions, purview, and criteria.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
BOARD DISCUSSION:
Ms. McGovern reminded the board to use the criteria given to decide if condi�ons have been met or
not.
Ms. Pit said most of the criteria has been met and would like to move forward.
Mr. Blue said it’s good they are making improvements and increasing the health of the property in
general, everything seems to be met. He ques�oned the ADA accessibility.
Mr. Canfield favors the resolu�on as somebody who skis that side of the mountain.
Ms. Suton thinks they have met the criteria and she is for it.
Mr. Gorman said he has no problem with it.
Ms. Benede� said it seems straight forward and supports it.
Mr. Knight thinks the review criteria has been met and supports it.
Mr. Suazo said the remodel is fine, the right of way gives him pause, the half third deck and stairway to
nowhere is ridiculous but supports it.
Ms. McGovern said she thinks the project is in compliance with their review criteria. The accessibility
concerns have been addressed and she is in favor of moving it forward.
Ms. Johnson proposed appropriate mo�on language to amend the resolu�on.
MOTION: Mr. Canfield moved to approve resolu�on #8 with amendments. Mr. Gorman seconded.
Roll call vote: Mr. Blue, yes; Mr. Knight, yes; Mr. Canfield, yes; Mr. Suazo, no; Mr. Gorman, yes; Ms.
Benede�, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes. 6-1 vote, mo�on passes.
5
REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2023
Mr. Canfield mo�oned to adjourn the mee�ng. Mr. Blue seconded. All in favor, mee�ng adjourned.
Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk
6
Page | 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Haley Hart, Long-Range Planner
THROUGH: Amy Simon, Planning Director
MEETING DATE: October 17th, 2023
RE: 360 Lake Avenue
Request for Hallam Lake Bluff Review and Residential Design Standard
Variation Reviews, PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT:
Lake Avenue Partners LLC; 690 S.
Paytonville Ave.; Southlake, TX
76092
REPRESENTATIVE:
Chris Bendon, BendonAdams
LOCATION:
Street Address:
360 Lake Avenue
Legal Description:
Subdivision: Erdman Partnership Lot
Split Lot: 1, County of Pitkin, State of
Colorado
Parcel ID:
2735-121-32-001
CURRENT ZONING & LAND USE:
Medium Density (R-6)
The property contains a non-
conforming double basement.
PROPOSAL:
To build a single-family residence on
the partially developed lot and gain
Hallam Lake Bluff approval and
Residential Design Standard
Variations for the proposed design.
SUMMARY: The Applicant requests to fully develop the
parcel at 360 Lake Ave with a single-family residence.
The lot is partially developed with a non-confirming
double basement which will not be altered in this
proposed design therefore does not trigger a Special
Review to Continue a Non-conformity. To proceed, the
proposal requires Hallam Lake Bluff review and
Residential Design Standards (RDS), and RDS
Variations are requested. Staff finds the application to
meet the applicable review criteria for Hallam Lake Bluff
but does not find the application to meet RDS
Alternative Compliance for all requested variations.
Figure 1: Property Location, 360 Lake Ave
7
Page | 2
LAND USE REVIEWS:
The Applicant is requesting the following Land Use approvals from the Planning and Zoning
Commission (P&Z):
• Hallam Lake Bluff Environmentally Sensitive Area Review (Chapter 26.435.060): the
property is located in the Hallam Lake Bluff Environmentally Sensitive Area, and
development in this area requires review and approval by the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
• Residential Design Standard Variations (Chapter 26.410): the proposal does not comply
with One-story Element, Flexible, (Section 26.410.030.B.4), Entry Porch Height, Flexible
(Section 26.410.030.D.3), Window Placement, Flexible (Section 26.210.030.E.2), and
Light well/Stairwell Location, Flexible (Section 26.210.030.E.4) Residential Design
Standards. All other RDS requirements are met.
The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final decision-making authority on these reviews.
BACKGROUND:
The application proposes to redevelop the property with a single-family residence on the partially
developed parcel. The subject site is a 23,958 square foot lot located in the Medium Density (R-
6) zone district. The parcel is Lot 1 of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split, recorded November 1990
at Book 25, Page 42. The property is within the Hallam Lake Bluff Environmentally Sensitive Area
and subject to Hallam Lake Bluff review.
The 360 Lake Ave property
has an extensive history with
multiple approvals over the
last two decades, many of
which were not completed or
partially completed. Hallam
Lake Bluff approval was
granted by the Planning and
Zoning Commission to
redevelop the parcel via
Resolution No. 12, Series of
2013. A building permit was
issued in June 2014
(0065.2014.ARBK) consistent
with the original approval. In
2015 the applicant applied for
an amendment to the original
land use approval, the
Planning and Zoning
Commission granted approval
for those amendments via Resolution No. 22, Series of 2015. A change order was submitted, and
an amended approval was granted March 2016. From the date of the original land use application
to the submission of the most recent change order, a number of Land Use Code amendments
were approved. Some elements of the proposed design, including a double basement were no
longer allowed under the current code. The Community Development Director issued an
Administrative Determination (Reception #630942) that clarified vesting for the approval and
established applicable code requirements, specifically as it relates to the previously approved
Figure 2: Rendering of Aerial View and Hallam Lake Bluff
Facing Facade
8
Page | 3
double basement. The determination allowed for the double basement to remain. New architects
were hired and alterations to the architecture were proposed in 2018. The project team and city
staff worked through ESA and RDS reviews from 2018 to 2020, but the application set forth at
that time was never constructed.
In 2023, an updated set of plans was submitted for ESA and RDS review, these plans and design
are the subject of this application.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The current application requests to build a single-family, one-story residence atop of a two-level
basement, foundation walls, and infrastructure and drainage improvements that have already
occurred on the parcel from previous approvals. The existing two-level basement is considered a
non-conforming structure, but no alterations to this structure are included in the application,
therefore do not trigger a review. The updated plans, however, must comply with the City’s current
LUC and Building Code.
Hallam Lake Bluff reviews are needed due to the proximity to Hallam Lake which is located in the
rear of the home. RDS Variations are requested to be approved by the P&Z to allow elements
that do not comply with RDS to remain. The RDS Variations requested include One-story Element,
Entry Porch Height, Window Placement, and Light well/Stairwell Location.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Below are Staff Comments for each of the requested reviews:
Hallam Lake Bluff:
Hallam Lake Bluff review limits the extent of development within proximity of the Hallam Lake
Bluff area to avoid adverse impacts on the nature preserve below. Topics that are regulated
include proximity of development to the top of slope, the height of development adjacent to the
top of slope, lighting, and non-native landscaping.
Previous work to re-establish the bluff area and install drainage infrastructure was completed in
a prior approval. The applicant’s current scope includes planting native vegetation at grade and
for screening purposes within the bluff. The proposed development is not within the top of slope
setback or the 45-degree progressive height limit. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with
no lights directed towards Hallam Lake. The City of Aspen Parks, Engineering, and Planning
departments have reviewed the application for compliance with the Hallam Lake Bluff review
criteria (Section 26.435.060) and has found all applicable review criteria to be met.
Residential Design Standard Variations:
The City of Aspen’s RDS standards were created to ensure a strong connection between
residences and streets; ensure buildings provide articulations to break up bulk and mass; and
preserve historic neighborhood scale and character. The standards do not prescribe architectural
style, but do require that each home, while serving the needs of its owner, contribute positively to
the streetscape. It is important to note that staff holds the standards to strict scrutiny for new
development in order to create consistency with past approvals and desired outcomes for
development and visual impacts within the City. It is important to note that although 360 Lake Ave
is behind the lot of 350 Lake Ave, RDS still applies and locations of lots and their orientation
towards the pedestrian and street experience are still reviewed. The application requests
Variations to four Residential Design Standards:
1. One-story Element
9
Page | 4
2. Entry Porch Height
3. Window Placement
4. Light well/Stairwell Location
These standards are all “flexible” standards that if not met in the letter or specific language of the
standard can be reviewed administratively for Alternative Compliance – if staff finds that the intent
of the standard is met.
Pursuant to 26.410.020.C. Variations, projects that do not meet the criteria for Administrative
Review or Alternative Compliance (as determined by staff) may be reviewed by the P&Z
Commission, or HPC if appropriate. An applicant may also choose to apply directly for a variation
if desired. In this application, the request for RDS Variations were combined with the Hallam Lake
Bluff review.
An application requesting a variation from the RDS shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall
find that the variation, if granted would:
1. Provide an alternative design approach that meets the overall intent of the standard as
indicated in the intent statement for that standard, as well as the general intent statements
in Section 26.410.010(a)(1)—(3); or
2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
P&Z is the final decision maker in determining if the four standards requested for RDS Variation
meet the overall intent of the standard or are necessary due to site-specific constraints.
In the proposed design, the home is a single level home. With the exception of the four standards
identified above and described below, staff believes the project meets the remainder of the RDS.
1. The One-story Element standard seeks to establish human scale building features as
perceived from the street and express lower and upper floors on front façades to reduce
perceived mass. There are three options to meet this standard, and each option has
dimensions at which either a projecting one-story element, loggia or one-story stepdown
must occur to comply.
The applicant wishes to
pursue Option 2 – Loggia
where “the front façade
of the principal building
shall have an open
loggia that is recessed at
least six (6) feet but no
more than ten (10) feet
from the front façade and
has a width equivalent to
at least twenty percent
(20%) of the building's
(or unit's) overall width.
The loggia shall be open on at least two (2) sides and face the street. This one-story
element shall be a minimum of fifty (50) square feet in area”.
Figure 3. Front Façade of 360 Lake Ave
13’
10
Page | 5
Staff finds the current design does not meet Option 2 – Loggia, as loggia, as defined in the
Land Use Code is: “a deck or porch attached to a living space and open on at least one (1)
side developed under a roof as an integral part of the building's mass rather than as an
appended element”.
From Staff’s perspective, the current front-entry design is not a loggia, see Figure 3, rather
a front porch as the roof is not an integral part of the buildings mass and is an appended
element. Additionally, the applicant calculates the entire front patio area rather than what
is under the roof. Staff calculates the proposed loggia/front porch entry as 9’-2” in width,
equating to approximately 9% of the building’s overall width rather than 49.67% as
presented in the application. The loggia, per standard Section 26.410.030.B.4.d.2- Loggia,
shall be a width of 20% of the building’s overall width. The front entry connection shall not
be recessed more than 10 feet. The current design has the front entry recessed 20’-7”.
Entry features are used to establish the one-story feature and P&Z has the authority to
determine if the design meets the intent statement of the One-story Element standards.
Staff finds that the applicant’s dimensional illustrations, the width percentage, the loggia’s
square footage and the recessed distance, do not meet the options for One-story Element,
Loggia nor does the applicant meet the overall intent or show site-specific constraints.
Most importantly, none of the features on the front façade of the home present as one-
story as defined by the RDS: “A portion of a building between the surface of the finished
floor and the ceiling immediately above; or the wall plate height where no additional stories
are located above. One story shall not exceed 10 feet for purposes of the Residential
Design Standards”.
The proposed dimensions of the proposed loggia (nor any other street facing architectural
elements), do not meet the one-story definition nor meet the intent of the standard nor
show why a site-specific constraint exists. P&Z has the authority to determine if the
proposed design meet the variation criteria and are appropriate for new
construction.
2. The Entry Porch Height standard promotes porches that are built at a one-story human-
scale and that are compatible with historic Aspen residential buildings.
One Story, as defined by RDS, is “a portion of a building between the surface of the finished
floor and the ceiling immediately above; or the wall plate height where no additional stories
are located above. One story shall not exceed 10 feet for purposes of the Residential
Design Standards.” The current design does not include a second story floor, yet the
current design has the entry canopy measuring approximately 13’, see Figure 3, in height
which does not meet this standard. The request is to increase the vertical dimension of the
entry porch which is incompatible with the intent of RDS to ensure buildings provide
articulations to break up bulk and mass and provide human-scaled features.
Staff finds the dimensions do not meet the intent of the standard nor show why a site-
specific constraint exists. P&Z has the authority to determine if the dimensional
variations meet these criteria and are appropriate for new construction.
3. The Window Placement standard seeks to preserve the historic architectural character of
Aspen by preventing large expanses of vertical glass windows that dominate street-facing
façades. Overly tall expanses of glass on a street-facing façade do not relate well to human
11
Page | 6
scale. Designs should utilize windows that provide a sense of demarcation between stories
and pedestrian scale.
One story shall not exceed 10 feet for purposes of the RDS. The current design does not
include a second story floor, yet the current design includes windows to the left of the front
door entry and the street-facing facade that are approximately 13’-6” in height which does
not meet this standard, see Figure 4.
The request is to increase the vertical appearance of the entry porch which is incompatible
with the intent of RDS to ensure buildings provide articulations to break up bulk and mass
and provide human-scaled, street facing features. Staff finds the dimensions do not meet
the intent of the standard to prevent large expanses of vertical glass windows that dominate
street-facing façades, nor show why a site-specific constraint exists. P&Z has the
authority to determine if the dimensional variations meet these criteria and are
appropriate for new construction.
4. The Light well/Stairwell Location standard seeks to minimize negative visual impacts to the
street and discourage visual and physical disconnection between buildings and streets.
Building designs should avoid placing light wells, areaways, skylights, and stairwells
between primary buildings and streets.
As opposed to the One-story Element, Entry Porch Height, and Window Placement
standards, which are all vertical elements in the proposed design, the Light well/Stairwell
Location is a horizontal element in the proposed design. The light well will be approximately
120 feet setback from the street. Since this element is flat and horizontal to the ground the
visual impacts by this element are less impactful than the other variation requests. The
visual and physical disconnection of the light well is considered to meet the intent due to
its minimal size and distance to the street. Staff finds this criterion to meet the variation
criteria. P&Z has the authority to determine if variation on location meets these
criteria and are appropriate for new construction.
Generally, staff does not support variation requests for new construction unless there are site-
specific constraints that limit design flexibility. In this case, staff does not perceive any site-specific
constraints, but instead views three of the four variation requests as design choices that are simply
inconsistent with the dimensions and intent of the RDS.
Figure 4. Front Façade Windows of 360 Lake Ave
12
Page | 7
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
The application was referred to the Engineering, and Parks Departments for the aspects of the
project as they relate to the Hallam Lake Bluff review. These reviews did not identify anything that
would prevent approval of the land use application. These agencies did however request
conditions of approval which have been included in the draft resolution to address topics that will
need to be satisfied prior to building permit issuance or receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy/Letter
of Completion.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends P&Z approve the Hallam Lake Bluff Review and RDS Light well/Stairwell
Location Variation. Staff recommends P&Z not include the RDS One-story Element, Entry Porch
Height, and Window Placement Variation requests in the approval. If P&Z agrees with the staff
recommendation and does not approve three of the variation requests, the project would need to
redesign these elements to meet RDS.
Two alternative Resolutions are attached:
Alternative A - The first would approve all requests in the application – including Hallam Lake
Bluff Review and the four variation requests.
Alternative B - The second approves Hallam Lake Bluff Review and a variation for the location
of the lightwell/stairwell.
Staff Recommends approval of Resolution #__, Series of 2023 – Alternative “B”
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Alternative A – Reflects Request of Application
“I move to approve Resolution #__, Series of 2023 provided in the packet as Alternative A,
based on a finding that all applicable review criteria are met for Hallam Lake Bluff Review
and for Residential Design Standards variations as requested in the application.”
OR
Alternative B – Reflects Staff Recommendation
“I move to approve Resolution #__, Series of 2023 provided in the packet as Alternative B,
based on a finding that all applicable review criteria are met for Hallam Lake Bluff Review
and that the request for Light well/Stairwell Location Variation within the Residential Design
Standards.”
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #__, Series of 2023 – Alternative A (Applicants Request)
Resolution #__, Series of 2023 – Alternative B (Staff Recommendation)
Exhibit A – Hallam Lake Bluff Review Criteria
Exhibit B – RDS Variation Review Criteria
Exhibit C – Application
13
P&Z Resolution #__, Series of 2023
1
RESOLUTION #__
SERIES OF 2023
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GRANTING APPROVAL FOR HALLAM LAKE BLUFF REVIEW AND RESIDENTIAL
DESIGN STANDARD VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 360 LAKE
AVE., LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS ERDMAN PARTNERSHIP LOT SPLIT, LOT:1,
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-32-001
WHEREAS, the Community Development department received an application from
BendonAdams, representing Lake Avenue Partners LLC; 690 S. Paytonville Ave.; Southlake, TX
76092, requesting Hallam Lake Bluff Review and Residential Design Standard Variation reviews
related to a proposed single-family residence development located at 360 Lake Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the property is located in the Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district;
and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development department Staff reviewed the application for
compliance with the applicable review standards; and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the Land Use Code standards, and referral of
the application to other City Departments for comments, the Community Development Director
recommended approval of the requested development application; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered
the application under the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code as identified herein, in
particular sections 26.435.060 – Hallam Lake Bluff and 26.410.020.C – Residential Design
Standard Variations, considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director
and took and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on October 17th, 2023;
and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development
proposal for Hallam Lake Bluff Review and Residential Design Standard Variations meets the
applicable review criteria and that approval of the request as described below is consistent with
the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution
furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare, and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission approves Resolution #__,
Series of 2023, by a __ to __ (__ - __) vote, approving the requested land use reviews as identified
herein.
14
P&Z Resolution #__, Series of 2023
2
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission finds as follows:
Section 1: Hallam Lake Bluff Review
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a Hallam Lake Bluff Review for development
within the Hallam Lake Bluff Review Area as depicted in Exhibit A. The Parks and Engineering,
and Zoning Departments recommended conditions of approval regarding the Hallam Lake Bluff
Review that must be met prior to or at building permit issuance are described in Section 3.
Section 2: Residential Design Standard Variations and Approval
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Residential Design Standard Review with
Variations to One-story Element, Entry Porch Height, and Window Placement, and Light
well/Stairwell Location as depicted and further described in Exhibit B to this Resolution.
Section 3: Conditions of Approval
The following conditions of approval must be met prior to building permit issuance:
• The project must comply with all applicable Engineering Standards prior to building permit
issuance, including requirements for a Major Development within the Urban Runoff Plan.
• Compliance with applicable Parks requirements will be verified prior to building permit
issuance.
• The project must comply with all applicable Land Use Code and Building Code
requirements.
• Verification that the height over topography represented in the land use review is consistent
with the final civil grading plans provided as part of the permit application is required prior
to building permit issuance. Any deviation from the plan providing during land use review
will be evaluated to determine is an amendment to this approval is required. The extent of
the changes will determine if an amendment is required.
• The applicant will be required to meet the lighting code at time of permit submission to
document and show compliance with downcast and direction of lighting requirements.
Section 4: Material Representations
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented
before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such site development
approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an
authorized entity.
Section 5: Existing Litigation
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 6: Severability
15
P&Z Resolution #__, Series of 2023
3
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 Commission at its meeting on October 17, 2023.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
___________________________________ ________________________
James R. True, City Attorney Teraissa McGovern, Chair
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tracy Terry, Municipal Court Clerk
Attachment:
Exhibit A – Approved Drawings
Exhibit B – RDS Approval Checklist and Drawings
16
P&Z Resolution #__, Series of 2023
1
RESOLUTION #__
SERIES OF 2023
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GRANTING APPROVAL FOR HALLAM LAKE BLUFF REVIEW AND RESIDENTIAL
DESIGN STANDARD VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 360 LAKE
AVE., LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS ERDMAN PARTNERSHIP LOT SPLIT, LOT:1,
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-32-001
WHEREAS, the Community Development department received an application from
BendonAdams, representing Lake Avenue Partners LLC; 690 S. Paytonville Ave.; Southlake, TX
76092, requesting Hallam Lake Bluff Review and Residential Design Standard Variation reviews
related to a proposed single-family residence development located at 360 Lake Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the property is located in the Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district;
and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development department Staff reviewed the application for
compliance with the applicable review standards; and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the Land Use Code standards, and referral of
the application to other City Departments for comments, the Community Development Director
recommended approval of the requested development application; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered
the application under the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code as identified herein, in
particular sections 26.435.060 – Hallam Lake Bluff and 26.410.020.C – Residential Design
Standard Variations, considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director
and took and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on October 17th, 2023;
and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development
proposal for Hallam Lake Bluff Review and Residential Design Standard Variations meets the
applicable review criteria and that approval of the request as described below is consistent with
the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution
furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare, and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission approves Resolution #__,
Series of 2023, by a __ to __ (__ - __) vote, approving the requested land use reviews as identified
herein.
17
P&Z Resolution #__, Series of 2023
2
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission finds as follows:
Section 1: Hallam Lake Bluff Review
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a Hallam Lake Bluff Review for development
within the Hallam Lake Bluff Review Area as depicted in Exhibit A. The Parks and Engineering,
and Zoning Departments recommended conditions of approval regarding the Hallam Lake Bluff
Review that must be met prior to or at building permit issuance are described in Section 3.
Section 2: Residential Design Standard Variations and Approval
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Residential Design Standard Review with
Variations to Light well/Stairwell Location as depicted and further described in Exhibit B to this
Resolution.
Section 3: Conditions of Approval
The following conditions of approval must be met prior to building permit issuance:
• The project must comply with all applicable Engineering Standards prior to building permit
issuance, including requirements for a Major Development within the Urban Runoff Plan.
• Compliance with applicable Parks requirements will be verified prior to building permit
issuance.
• The project must comply with all applicable Land Use Code and Building Code
requirements.
• Verification that the height over topography represented in the land use review is consistent
with the final civil grading plans provided as part of the permit application is required prior
to building permit issuance. Any deviation from the plan providing during land use review
will be evaluated to determine is an amendment to this approval is required. The extent of
the changes will determine if an amendment is required.
• The applicant will be required to meet the lighting code at time of permit submission to
document and show compliance with downcast and direction of lighting requirements.
Section 4: Material Representations
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented
before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such site development
approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an
authorized entity.
Section 5: Existing Litigation
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 6: Severability
18
P&Z Resolution #__, Series of 2023
3
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 Commission at its meeting on October 17, 2023.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
___________________________________ ________________________
James R. True, City Attorney Teraissa McGovern, Chair
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tracy Terry, Municipal Court Clerk
Attachment:
Exhibit A – Approved Drawings
Exhibit B – RDS Approval Checklist and Drawings
19
EXHIBIT A
HALLAM LAKE BLUFF REVIEW CRITERIA
1
26.435.060. Hallam Lake Bluff review.
C. Hallam Lake Bluff review standards. No development shall be permitted within the Hallam
Lake Bluff ESA unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development meets all of the following requirements:
1. No development, excavation or fill, other than native vegetation planting, shall take place below
the top of slope.
Staff Response: No new development is proposed below the top of slope in this application.
Previous work to re-establish the bluff area and install drainage infrastructure was completed
in a prior approval. Applicant’s current scope includes planting native vegetation. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
2. All development within the fifteen-foot setback from the top of slope shall be at grade. Any
proposed development not at grade within the fifteen-foot setback shall not be approved unless
the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the following conditions can be met:
a) A unique condition exists on the site where strict adherence to the top-of-slope setback will
create an unworkable design problem.
b) Any intrusion into the top-of-slope setback or height limit is minimized to the greatest
extent possible.
c) Other parts of the structure or development on the site are located outside the top-of-slope
setback line or height limit to the greatest extent possible.
d) Landscape treatment is increased to screen the structure or development in the setback from
all adjoining properties.
Staff Response: All proposed development within the 15-foot setback from top of slope is at
grade. Previous bluff restoration work includes walls for retention, rip-rap for erosion, an
existing storm water outfall, landscape boulder and lawn. Native plantings on the parameter of
the property will screen the structure with at least 50% screening from the Hallam Lake Bluff.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. All development outside the fifteen-foot setback from top of slope shall not exceed a height
delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five-degree angle from ground level at the top of slope.
Height shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the
definition for height set forth at Section 26.104.100 and the method of calculating height set
forth at Section 26.575.020.
Staff Response: The proposed development does not have any portion of the structure extending
beyond the 45-degree-angle from the ground level at the top of slope. Staff finds this criterion to
be met.
20
EXHIBIT A
HALLAM LAKE BLUFF REVIEW CRITERIA
2
4. A landscape plan shall be submitted with all development applications. Such plan shall include
native vegetative screening of no less than fifty percent (50%) of the development as viewed
from the rear (slope) of the parcel. All vegetative screening shall be maintained in perpetuity
and shall be replaced with the same or comparable material should it die.
Staff Response: A landscaping plan and photos of the site showing adequate screening has been
provided. This will be verified prior to building permit issuance. S taff finds this criterion to be
met.
5. All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the nature
preserve or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with Section 26.575.150.
Staff Response: The applicant will be required to meet the lighting code, and given the lack of
detail in the application, a condition of approval will be included that requires the building
permit to document and show compliance with downcast and direction of lighting requirements.
Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions.
6. No fill material or debris shall be placed on the face of the slope. Historic drainage patterns and
rates must be maintained. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained down the slope.
Staff Response: The applicant has been working with the Engineering department to ensure
proper drainage of the site. A construction berm is proposed for the lake bluff side of the property
Figure 1: 45-degree-angle from Ground Level at the Top of Slope
Figure 1. 45 Degree Angle from Ground Level
21
EXHIBIT A
HALLAM LAKE BLUFF REVIEW CRITERIA
3
but will be removed prior to completion of the project and no fill material or debris will be placed
on the face of the slope. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
7. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect or engineer shall be submitted
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope and pertinent elevations above
sea level.
Staff Response: A site plan and sections have been provided showing proposed site elements,
the top of slope and relevant elevations. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
22
EXHIBIT B
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD
1
26.410.030
B.1 Articulation of Building Mass (Non-flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to reduce the overall perceived mass and bulk of buildings on a property
as viewed from all sides. Designs should promote light and air access between adjacent properties.
Designs should articulate building walls by utilizing multiple forms to break up large expansive
wall planes. Buildings should include massing and articulation that convey forms that are similar
in massing to historic Aspen residential buildings. This standard is critical in the Infill Area where
small lots, small side and front setbacks, alleys and historic Aspen building forms are prevalent.
Designs should change the plane of a building's sidewall, step a primary building's height down to
one-story in the rear portion or limit the overall depth of the structure.
Staff Response: The maximum side wall depth is 44’- 5” on the south façade and 17’-7” on the
north façade meeting Option 26.410.030(b)(1)d.1 – Maximum Sidewall Depth. The current
design of 360 Lake Ave meets the intent of this standard. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
B.2 Building Orientation (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to establish a relationship between buildings and streets to create an
engaging streetscape and discourage the isolation of homes from the surrounding neighborhood.
The placement of buildings should seek to frame street edges physically or visually. Buildings
should be oriented in a manner such that they are a component of the streetscape, which consists
of the street itself and the buildings that surround it. Building orientation should provide a sense
of interest and promote interaction between buildings and passersby. Building orientation is
important in all areas of the city but is particularly important in the Infill Area where there is a
strong pattern of buildings that are parallel to the street. Designs should prioritize the visibility of
the front façade from the street by designing the majority of the front façade to be parallel to the
street or prominently visible from the street. Front facades, porches, driveways, windows, and
doors can all be designed to have a strong and direct relationship to the street.
Staff Response: The front façade of the home has a strong orientation towards Lake Avenue.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
B.3 Build-to Requirement (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to establish a consistent physical pattern of front façades close to and
parallel to streets in order to frame the street. The placement of buildings should respond to the
street by framing street edges physically. Buildings should be located to provide a strong physical
presence and integration within the streetscape, which consists of the street itself and the
buildings that surround it. This standard is most important in the Infill Area where a strong pattern
of smaller front setbacks and consistent building orientation exists. Designs should maximize the
amount of the front façade that is close to the street while still providing articulation and
expressing a human scale. Porches, front façade walls, rooflines and other elements can all
contribute to framing the street.
Staff Response: 76% of the front façade is building within 5 feet of the street-facing setback line.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
23
B.4 One-story Element (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to establish human scale building features as perceived from the street
and express lower and upper floors on front façades to reduce perceived mass. Designs should
utilize street-facing architectural elements, such as porches, that imitate those of historic Aspen
residential buildings. Buildings should provide visual evidence or demarcation of the stories of a
building to relate to pedestrians. This standard is important in all areas of the city. Front porches
or portions of the front-most wall of the front façade should clearly express a one-story scale as
perceived from the street. Changes in material or color can also be incorporated into these
elements to help to strengthen the establishment of a one-story scale.
Staff Response: The
applicant wishes to
pursue Option 2 –
Loggia where “the front
façade of the principal
building shall have an
open loggia that is
recessed at least six (6)
feet but no more than ten
(10) feet from the front
façade and has a width
equivalent to at least
twenty percent (20%) of
the building's (or unit's)
overall width. The
loggia shall be open on at least two (2) sides and face the street. This one-story element shall be
a minimum of fifty (50) square feet in area”.
Staff finds the current design does not meet Option 2 – Loggia as Loggia, as defined in the Land
Use Code is: “a deck or porch attached to a living space and open on at least one (1) side
developed under a roof as an integral part of the building's mass rather than as an appended
element”.
From Staff’s perspective, the current front-entry design is not a loggia, see Figure 1, rather a
front porch as the roof is not an integral part of the buildings mass and is an appended element.
Additionally, the applicant calculates the entire front porch rather than what is under the roof.
Staff calculates the loggia/front porch entry as 9’-2” in width, equating to approximately 9% of
the building’s overall width rather than 49.67% as presented in the application. The loggia, per
standard Section 26.410.030.B.4.d.2- Loggia, shall be a width of 20% of the building’s overall
width. The applicant provides in the application that the loggia is 49.67% of the overall width.
The front entry connection shall not be recessed more than 10 feet. The current design has the
front entry recessed 20’-7”.
Entry features are used to establish the one-story feature and P&Z has the authority to determine
if the design meets the intent statement of the One-story Element standards. Staff finds that the
applicant’s dimensional illustrations, the width percentage, the loggia’s square footage and the
Figure 1: One-story Element Alternative Compliance
13’
24
EXHIBIT B
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD
3
recessed distance, do not meet the options for One-story Element, Loggia nor does the applicant
meet the overall intent or show site-specific constraints. Most importantly, none of the features
on the front façade of the home present as one-story as defined by the RDS: “A portion of a
building between the surface of the finished floor and the ceiling immediately above; or the wall
plate height where no additional stories are located above. One story shall not exceed 10 feet for
purposes of the Residential Design Standards”. The proposed dimensions of the proposed
“loggia” (nor any other street facing architectural elements), do not meet the one-story definition
nor meet the intent of the standard nor show why a site-specific constraint exists. Staff finds this
criterion do not meet Alternative Compliance.
C.1 Garage Access (Non-flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to minimize potential conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles by
concentrating parking along alleys and away from the street where pedestrian activity is highest.
This standard also seeks to minimize the visibility of opaque and unarticulated garage doors from
streets by placing them in alleys wherever possible. Properties with alleys shall utilize the alley as
an opportunity to place the garage in a location that is subordinate to the principal building, further
highlighting the primary building from the street. This standard is important for any property where
an alley is available, which is most common in the Infill Area.
Staff Response: 360 Lake Ave’s garage is accessed from a shared driveway/easement through
350 Lake Ave and does not have an alley. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C.2 Garage Placement (Non-flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to prevent large expanses of unarticulated facades close to the street
and ensure garages are subordinate to the principal building for properties that feature driveway
and garage access directly from the street. Buildings should seek to locate garages behind
principal buildings so that the front façade of the principal building is highlighted. Where locating
the garage behind the front façade of the principal building is not feasible or required, designs
should minimize the presence of garage doors as viewed from the street. This standard is
important in all areas of the city where alley access is not an option.
Staff Response: 360 Lake Ave is accessed through a shared driveway/easement through 350
Lake Ave. The current design meets Option 2. Side-Loaded Garage Forward of Street-Facing
Façade as the garage is side-loaded off the driveway/easement and is perpendicular to Lake Ave.
Additionally, the garage is designed with windows and fenestration to appear like the rest of the
residence. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C.3 Garage Dimensions (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to minimize the presence of wide garages as perceived from streets
and ensure that garages are subordinate to the principal building. Designs should promote an
active streetscape that is not dominated by wide expanses of garage doors. Garage doors should
either be hidden from public view or their width minimized. This standard is important in all
areas of the city.
Staff Response: 360 Lake Ave is accessed through a shared driveway/easement through 350
Lake Ave. The garage door is not street facing as it is facing the easement/driveway with a width
25
of 20’ total meeting the standard. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C.4 Garage Door Design (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to promote a streetscape that maximizes visual interest by minimizing
unarticulated expanses of garage doors. Garage doors that utilize increased articulation, changes
in façade depth and profile of materials, windows and other features to break up the garage door
should be prioritized. This standard is critical for any property where garage doors are visible
from the street.
Staff Response: The garage door is not street facing as it is facing the easement/driveway. The
current design meets Option 2, Appearance of Two Separate Doors as there is are two doors with
a 1 foot in width element separating the doors. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
D.1 Entry Connection (Non-flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to promote visual and physical connections between buildings and the
street. Buildings should use architectural and site planning features to establish a connection
between these two (2) elements. Buildings shall not use features that create barriers or hide the
entry features of the house such as fences, hedgerows or walls. Buildings and site planning
features should establish a sense that one can directly enter a building from the street through the
use of pathways, front porches, front doors that face the street and other similar methods. This
standard is critical in all areas of the city.
Staff Response: The front façade has a covered front porch that is open on two sides and is 157
square feet with a demarcated pathway from the driveway/easement. The current design meets
Option 2 – Open Front Porch. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
D.2 Door Height (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to retain historic architectural character by ensuring modestly scaled
doors that are not out of scale when compared to historic Aspen residential buildings. Large,
oversized doors should be avoided so as not to overwhelm front façades and distort the sense of
human scale as perceived from the street. This standard is important in all areas of the city.
Staff Response: The front entry door is 8’ in height meeting the Standard. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
D.3. Entry Porch Height (Flexible).
Intent. This standard promotes porches that are built at a one-story human-scale that are
compatible with historic Aspen residential buildings. This standard prevents porches that are out
of scale with the street and traditional porches seen in the surrounding neighborhood. Porch
designs should reinforce the one-story scale and help reduce perceived mass as viewed from the
street. This standard is critical for buildings in the Infill Area.
Staff Response: The Entry Porch Height standard promotes porches that are built at a one-story
human-scale and that are compatible with historic Aspen residential buildings.
One Story, as defined by RDS, is “a portion of a building between the surface of the finished floor
26
EXHIBIT B
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD
5
and the ceiling immediately above; or the wall plate height where no additional stories are
located above. One story shall not exceed 10 feet for purposes of the Residential Design
Standards.” The current design does not include a second story floor, yet the current design has
the entry canopy measuring approximately 13’ in height which does not meet this standard.
Staff finds the dimensions do
not meet the intent of the
standard nor show why a
site-specific constraint
exists. P&Z has the
authority to determine if the
dimensional variations meet
these criteria and are
appropriate for new
construction. Staff finds this
criterion do not meet
Alternative Compliance.
E.1 Principle Window (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to prevent large expanses of blank walls on the front façades of
principal buildings. A building should incorporate a significant sense of transparency on the front
façade. Designs should include prominent windows or groups of windows on the front façade to
help promote connection between the residence and street. This standard is important in all areas
of the city.
Staff Response: There are two windows 4’-6” by 4’-6” meeting Option 1 – Street-Facing
Principal Window. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
E.2 Window Placement (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to preserve the historic architectural character of Aspen by preventing
large expanses of vertical glass windows that dominate street-facing façades. Overly tall expanses
of glass on a street-facing façade do not relate well to human scale. Designs should utilize
windows that provide a sense of demarcation between stories and pedestrian scale. Where an
upper story window is located directly above a lower story window, a gap with no window should
be provided between them that is easily recognizable from the street and clearly differentiates
lower and upper stories. This standard is important in all areas of the city
Staff Response: The Window Placement standard seeks to preserve the historic architectural
Figure 2: Entry Porch Height Alternative Compliance
13’
27
character of Aspen by preventing large expanses of vertical glass windows that dominate street-
facing façades. Overly tall expanses of glass on a street-facing façade do not relate well to human
scale. Designs should utilize windows that provide a sense of demarcation between stories and
pedestrian scale.
One story shall not exceed
10 feet for purposes of the
Residential Design
Standards. The current
design does not include a
second story floor, yet the
current design includes
windows to the left of the
front door entry and the
street-facing facade that
are approximately 13’-6”
in height which does not
meet this standard, see
Figure 3. Staff finds the
dimensions do not meet the
intent of the standard to prevent large expanses of vertical glass windows that dominate street -
facing façades, nor show why a site-specific constraint exists. P&Z has the authority to determine
if the dimensional variations meet these criteria and are appropriate for new construction. Staff
finds this criterion to meet Alternative Compliance.
E.3 Non-orthogonal Window Limit (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to encourage rectilinear window shapes seen in Aspen's historic
residential architecture and discourages the proliferation or overuse of round or diagonal-oriented
windows. Designs should minimize the use of non-orthogonal windows that face the street in
order to help preserve the historic character of Aspen. This standard is critical in the Infill Area
where many of Aspen's historic residential buildings are located.
Staff Response: The current design does not include non-orthogonal windows. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
E.4 Light well/Stairwell Location (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to minimize negative visual impacts to the street and discourage visual
and physical disconnection between buildings and streets. Building designs should avoid placing
light wells, areaways, skylights, and stairwells between primary buildings and streets. These
features should be located away from the front of buildings. Designs should locate these elements
at the sides or rear of a principal building. This standard is most important in all areas of the city
with smaller setbacks.
Staff Response: The Light well/Stairwell Location standard seeks to minimize negative visual
impacts to the street and discourage visual and physical disconnection between buildings and
streets. Building designs should avoid placing light wells, areaways, skylights, and stairwells
Figure 3: Window Placement Alternative Compliance
28
EXHIBIT B
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD
7
between primary buildings and streets.
As opposed to the One-
story Element, Entry
Porch Height, and
Window Placement
standards, which are all
vertical elements in the
proposed design, the
Light well/Stairwell
Location is a horizontal
element in the proposed
design. The light well
will be approximately
120 feet setback from the
street. Since this element
is flat and horizontal to
the ground the visual
impacts by this element
are less impactful than
those dimensional
variation requests. The
visual and physical
disconnection of the light well is considered to meet the intent due to is flat plane and large
setback. Staff finds this criterion to meet Alternative Compliance. P&Z has the authority to
determine if variation on location meets these criteria and are appropriate for new construction.
Staff finds this criterion to meet Alternative Compliance.
E.5 Materials (Flexible).
Intent. This standard seeks to reinforce historic architectural character by preventing the use of
materials on single-family and duplex buildings that is in sharp contrast with use of materials
seen in historic Aspen residential buildings. Buildings should use materials consistently on all
sides of a building instead of simply applying a material on one façade of a building. Buildings
should seek to use heavier materials, such as brick or stone, as a base for lighter materials, such
as wood or stucco. Buildings should use materials that are similar in profile, texture and durability
to those seen in historic residential buildings in the city. This standard is important in all areas of
the city.
Staff Response: Materials of stone are used consistently on all sides of the proposed home
design. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
Figure 4: Light well/Stairwell Location Alternative Compliance
Figure 4: Light well/Stairwell Location Alternative Compliance
29
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
May 12, 2023
Updated August 21, 2023
Haley Hart
Long-Range Planner
City of Aspen
RE: 360 Lake Avenue; Lot 1, Erdman Partnership Lot Split
Hallam Lake Bluff Review, Residential Design Standards Review
Pre-Development Topography Determination
Ms. Hart:
Please accept this Hallam Lake Bluff
Review application for the partially-
developed parcel at 360 Lake Avenue.
This application also requests Residential
Design Standards approval, acceptance
of pre-development topography, and
acknowledgement of a non-conforming
structure which is intended to continue.
The ariel view to the right shows the 360
Lake Avenue property
An existing, partially built structure exists on the property consisting of a two-level
basement, foundation walls, and various infrastructure and drainage improvements. The
structure is protected and the site is secure. The existing structure is not habitable.
The property is addressed as 360 Lake Avenue and is legally defined as Lot 1, Erdman
Partnership Lot Split. The lot split
subdivision plat was filed November 26,
1990, with the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder in plat book 25, page 42, as
reception no. 328177. The applicant also
owns 350 Lake Avenue, located directly
west of 360. 350 is not subject to the
Hallam Lake Bluff Review and is not part
of this application.
The map to the right shows Lots 1 and 2
of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split
30
360 Lake Ave HLB
Page 2
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
The 360 property is located in the
City’s Medium-Density Zone District
(R-6). This property, as well as
adjacent properties, are not part of the
Original Townsite of Aspen and were
annexed into City jurisdiction in 1967.
Properties along Lake Avenue are not
aligned to the 30-foot by 100-foot
increment of most of the west end
neighborhood.
The map to the right
shows 360 Lake Ave in
the R-6 zone district
The previous home design was approved through the City’s Hallam Lake Bluff Review
process and construction was initiated. The two-level basement, foundation walls, various
infrastructure, and the drainage improvements were built. An amendment to the Hallam
Lake Bluff approval was processed, changing the above-grade architecture substantially
while moving some architectural massing away from the bluff. Construction continued
while further design considerations were being contemplated by the owner. Construction
slowed, eventually ceased, and the building permit for the previous home expired. The
property has since changed hands.
The architectural plans
attached to this application
show dimensions of the
double basement built during
prior ownership
During the sales contract period, discussion
with City staff regarding the status of the
prior permit, the land use approvals, and the
existing partially developed structure ensued. The previous Hallam Lake Bluff approval is
past the three-year period of Statutory Vested Rights and the land use approvals for the
property lapsed upon the expiration of the building permit. Confirmed by the City, the
existing two-level basement is considered a legally-established, non-conforming structure.
The structure was constructed according to regulations at the time according to a valid
building permit. The “double basement” may remain. However, additions to the property
must comply with the City’s current development limitations. Please see correspondence
with City staff on these matters, attached. The project adheres to the allowances and
limitations of Section 26.312.030 – Non-Conforming Structures. All additions to the
existing structure have been designed to comply with current codes including expansion
of basement areas designed to meet the City’s current depth limitations.
31
360 Lake Ave HLB
Page 3
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
Hallam Lake Bluff Review Area
The 360 property sits on a bluff overlooking
Hallam Lake to the east. Hallam Lake is owned
and operated by the Aspen Center for
Environmental Studies (ACES), one of Aspen’s
earliest non-profits with a focus on environmental
stewardship. Hallam Lake is one of the most
picturesque locations in Aspen.
Hallam Lake is pictured to the right.
In 1990 the city adopted regulations for
development along the bluff. In part,
development of the previous home on the 360
property propelled these regulations. The
previous 360 home was developed right on the
bluff edge and loomed over the lake. The
adopted standards now require a minimum
setback from the bluff edge and requirements for
vegetative screening and a heightened review by
the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to
development. The previous development plan
for this property established the “top-of-bluff.”
The current application continues to rely on this
previous determination.
The map above highlights 360 Lake Ave. (Lot
1) and the Hallam Lake Bluff review area.
The Hallam Lake Bluff review mandates a 15-foot setback
from the “top-of-slope.” This is the point at which the flat
topography of the property tips to the hillside going down to
Hallam Lake. Development within the 15-foot area is limited
to at-grade development – for example, a patio. The
proposed landscape plan provided by Design Workshop
specifies at-grade improvements in this area. No
development over the top-of-bluff is proposed. Please note
that the previous bluff restoration work included walls for
retaining in some areas, rip-rap to minimize erosion, and
plantings in the area downslope of the top-of-bluff.
The plan to the right is a snippet of
the landscape plan showing the top-
of-bluff and 15-foot setback
32
360 Lake Ave HLB
Page 4
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
The top-of-bluff is also used to implement a
progressive height limitation for development
close to the bluff edge. The height of
buildings must be below a 45-degree line
projected up from the top-of-bluff.
The graphic to the right is from the
City’s Land Use Code depicting the
progressive height limitation.
The graphic to the right
shows the proposed
home falling underneath
the progressive height
limit.
The Hallam Lake Bluff standards require screening with native vegetation, 50% or more
as viewed from the rear of the parcel. Previous plans demonstrated compliance with
prospective renderings prepared from just east of Hallam Lake looking back at the
property. Attached to the application is a rendering showing proposed plantings and
screening of the new home from the ACES property.
To the right are
ACES inhabitants
appreciating a
rendering of the
proposed new home
33
360 Lake Ave HLB
Page 5
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
1990 Lot Split Approval
The 360 parcel was created through a lot split subdivision in 1990. Prior to the lot split,
the lands that are now known as 350 and 360 Lake Avenue were platted as four lots with
Gillespie Street running east-west north of the lots. Gillespie Street was vacated while the
lands were under Pitkin County jurisdiction.
The snip to the right is
from the 1983 City of
Aspen zoning map showing
the lands paternal to 360.
A 1985 court decree, a quiet title action, established the boundaries of the parcel to include
lands east of the original four lots and to include roughly half of the former Gillespie right-
of-way. The 1990 Lot Split plat reflects the survey calls of the court decree.
The 1990 lot split approval granted by the Aspen City Council stipulated various conditions
of approval and created a specific site coverage and specific floor area for the parcel.
Condition No. 5 of Ordinance 66, series 1990, reads as follows:
5. The following FAR and site coverage limits will be:
Lot 1: FAR maximum - 4,468 s.f.; Site Coverage - 20% (4,791 s.f.)
Lot 2: FAR maximum - 3,449 s.f. (access easement is subtracted from lot
area for calculating FAR); Site Coverage - 30.34% (2,700 s.f.)
The design of the home on 360 Lake continues to rely on this specified site coverage and
floor area limitation. Please refer to the architectural plans demonstrating compliance with
these matters.
Conditions 6 and 7 of the 1990 Ordinance required development of an Accessory Dwelling
Unit on each newly created parcel of the lot split. A deed restriction was subsequently filed
(under a Gillespie address). In 2014, the Aspen City Council adopted Ordinance 5, Series
2014, voiding conditions 6 and 7 of Ordinance 66, Series 1990. The 360 property has the
option of including an ADU, but no longer the requirement.
The snip to
the right is
taken from
Ordinance 5,
2014.
34
360 Lake Ave HLB
Page 6
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
Proposed Design
Eigelberger Architecture and Design Workshop have combined to provide an exceptional
design for this property. The property is unique in that it is a “back-lot” of a front-back
subdivision that occurred in 1990. The 360 property, the back property, will be minimally
visible from Lake Avenue with most features of the property obscured by the intervening
property, 350 Lake Avenue.
The image to the right is a
rendering of the proposed
home as viewed from the east.
The design team has responded to the City’s Residential Design Standards as best as
practical under the circumstance. A completed RDS checklist is attached to this
application. “Alternate compliance” is requested on a few standards where compliance
with the standard must consider the intervening 350 property. The applicant owns both
properties and will be developing both 350 and 360 at the same time.
The proposed home includes a two-car garage, meeting the Land Use Code requirements
for parking. Additional area is available for guests and deliveries. Exterior lighting is
shown on the landscape plan with fixture specifications. All fixtures are compliant with the
City’s standards.
Please refer to design drawings for
complete exterior lighting details
All design details in the attached drawing set should be
considered conceptual in nature, indicative of design
intent but subject to slight modification between land use
review and building permit submission due to availability,
budget, and client preferences.
35
360 Lake Ave HLB
Page 7
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
Pre-Development Grade
A provision of the City’s Land Use Code allows the City to accept an estimate of “pre-
development topography.” This is useful in areas where steep slopes exist on a site as
the result of past human activities – for example a road cut or a pile of fill material. This
process allows a property owner to not be “punished” by virtue of past land disturbance.
In this case, the current state of the property is not indicative of natural grade with portions
of the property partially excavated and backfill around the existing structure partially
complete.
The property has an obvious history of past grade manipulation. The bluff was excavated
for the previous home and reconstructed during the most-recent construction effort. Using
topography from surveys provided prior to demolition of the Erdman residence, SGM
Engineering has prepared a “special topographic exhibit” representing their professional
estimate of site grades prior to development activity. The grades on this special
topographic exhibit are the basis for “natural grade” as the term is used to measure height,
floor area, and other matters affecting compliance of the proposal.
All plans submitted should be considered conceptual in nature and indicative of design
intent. The plans illustrate compliance with the R-6 Zone District but are not meant to limit
the property owner’s rights further than specified in the Land Use Code allowances in
effect on the date of this submission. Applicant reserves the right to adjust interior plans,
exterior materials, location and extent of fenestration, heights, parking layouts, landscape,
and floor area, as long as such changes are in compliance with the R-6 Zone District,
applicable provisions of the Hallam Lake Bluff Review requirements, and applicable City
regulations.
This application responds to the Hallam Lake Bluff review criteria, the City’s Residential
Design Standards and the zoning, parking, and lighting codes in effect on the date of
submission. Responses to each review criterion are attached to this application as Exhibit
1 and an RDS checklist is attached as Exhibit 2. We believe this application contains the
necessary information for a complete and competent review. Please let us know if
additional information is needed. We look forward to your review and will make ourselves
available for any questions or concerns you have. We can also arrange a site visit at your
request.
Kind Regards,
Chris Bendon, AICP
BendonAdams LLC
36
360 Lake Ave HLB
Page 8
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
Exhibits: previously submitted, new with this submission
A
1. Review Criteria Responses
1.1 DRC Comment Responses 8-21-23
2. RDS Checklist
3. Site Improvement Survey
4. Pre-Development Grade Analysis – Updated 8-15-23
5. Drainage Report – Updated 8-16-23
6. Civil & Grading Plan – Updated 7-21-23
7. Landscape plans including exterior lighting
8. Architecture Plans
9. Tree Report
10. Screening Rendering
11. Vicinity Map
B
1. Application Form
2. Authorization Letter
3. Authorized Signatory
4. Statement of Authority - 687907
5. Proof of Ownership
6. HOA Form
7. Agreement to Pay
8. Pre-application Conference Summary
C
1. Ordinance 66, 1990, Lot Split Approval
2. ADU Deed Restriction – 440645
3. Ordinance 5, 2014, Removed ADU Requirement
4. Release of ADU Restriction – 686861
5. Email Correspondence re: Basement
37
360 Lake HLB
Ex. A1, page 1
Exhibit A1
Review Criteria
26.435.060.a - Hallam Lake Bluff review Standards.
No development shall be permitted within the Hallam Lake Bluff ESA unless the Planning and
Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development meets all of the
following requirements:
1. No development, excavation or fill, other than native vegetation planting, shall take place
below the top of slope.
Response – All invasive work to re-establish the bluff area and install drainage
infrastructure is complete. Remaining work on the bluff will be limited to planting
native vegetation and routine maintenance. No excavation or fill activities will
occur.
2. All development within the 15-foot setback from the top of slope shall be at grade. Any
proposed development not at grade within the 15-foot setback shall not be approved unless
the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the following conditions can be met:
a. A unique condition exists on the site where strict adherence to the top-of-slope
setback will create an unworkable design problem.
b. Any intrusion into the top-of-slope setback or height limit is minimized to the greatest
extent possible.
c. Other parts of the structure or development on the site are located outside the top-
of-slope setback line or height limit to the greatest extent possible.
d. Landscape treatment is increased to screen the structure or development in the
setback from all adjoining properties.
Response – All proposed development within 15 feet of the top-of-bluff is at-
grade. Please refer to landscape architecture drawings attached to this
application.
3. All development outside the 15-foot setback from top of slope shall not exceed a height
delineated by a line drawn at a 45-degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Height
shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the
definition for height set forth at Section 26.104.100 and the method of calculating height set
forth at Section 26.575.020.
38
360 Lake HLB
Ex. A1, page 2
Response: The proposed design is compliant with the zone district height
limitation and the progressive height limit from the top-of-bluff. The top-of-bluff
varies across the property. Therefore, several sections and 3-D graphics of the
proposed architecture have been provided. Additional sections and/or 3-D
analysis can be provided upon request. A snippet of the architectural plan is
shown below. Please see attached architectural plans for more detail.
4. A landscape plan shall be submitted with all development applications. Such plan shall
include native vegetative screening of no less than fifty percent (50%) of the development
as viewed from the rear (slope) of the parcel. All vegetative screening shall be maintained
in perpetuity and shall be replaced with the same or comparable material should it die.
Response – The application includes a landscape plan prepared by Design
Workshop. A rendering of proposed conditions as viewed from a location on the
nature preserve to the east demonstrates compliance with the 50% screening
requirement. Landscape installations will be maintained in perpetuity and failed
plantings will be replaced in-kind.
5. All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the nature
preserve or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with Section 26.575.150.
Response – The application includes proposed exterior lighting. Please refer to
the landscape set attached to this application. All lighting has been designed in
compliance with the City’s lighting requirements in effect on the date of this
application. No lighting is directed down-slope towards the nature preserve.
6. No fill material or debris shall be placed on the face of the slope. Historic drainage patterns
and rates must be maintained. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained down the slope.
Response – The bluff area has been “reconstructed” during the work effort of
the prior building permit and “rip-rap” was installed as part of the drainage
improvement required by the City of Aspen. No fill material or debris will be
placed on the face of the bluff slope. Some plantings to effect screening may
occur. Historical drainage patterns are being maintained and hot tubs/pools will
not be drained over the slope.
39
360 Lake HLB
Ex. A1, page 3
7. Site sections drawn by a registered
architect, landscape architect or engineer
shall be submitted showing all existing and
proposed site elements, the top of slope
and pertinent elevations above sea level.
Response – Site sections as well as 3-
D diagrams are included in the drawing
set demonstrating compliance with the
setback requirement. Site sections
have been prepared by licensed
Architects at Eigelberger Architecture
& Design.
26.312.030 – Non-conforming structures.
a) Authority to continue. A nonconforming structure devoted to a use permitted in the zone
district in which it is located may be continued in accordance with the provisions of this
Chapter.
b) Normal maintenance. Normal maintenance to nonconforming structures may be
performed without affecting the authorization to continue as a nonconforming structure.
c) Extensions. A nonconforming structure shall not be extended by an enlargement or
expansion that increases the nonconformity. A nonconforming structure may be
extended or altered in a manner that does not change or that decreases the
nonconformity.
Response – The existing two-level basement is considered a legally-created
non-conforming structure. Please refer to email correspondence with City staff
on the matter, attached to this application. The two-level basement was built
according to applicable development limitations and pursuant to a valid building
permit. The two-level basement continues in the proposed design and will be
finished to the same level of finish as the remaining house. The existing two-
level basement is approximately 3,663 square feet (interior; 4,201sf measured to
the outside of wall) on the lowest level and 3,974 square feet (interior) on the first
level down. The footprint between the two levels is the same but the walls of the
lowest level are thicker for structural reasons. Hence the difference in square
footage between floors. Measurements were taken as interior-to-interior and do
not include exterior walls. The floor area sheets of the proposed measure to
exterior wall.
The lowest level of the basement will continue but not expand. The space will
be finished to the same condition as the rest of the home but not change in its
extent. The first level of the basement is proposed to be expanded and will
incorporate a crawl space below underneath. This expansion of the first level
basement has been designed in compliance with the City’s basement depth
limitations. This expansion will not increase the non-conformity – being the
presence of the basement’s second level. Both levels of the basement have been
factored into the allowable floor area measurements.
40
360 Lake HLB
Ex. A1, page 4
26.410.030 – Residential Design Standards
Response – Please refer to Exhibit 2 checklist and responses to the City’s
Residential Design Standards.
26.515.040 – Parking Requirements.
(a) General requirements. All applicable development shall accommodate its projected parking
impacts as provided in this Chapter. Parking Requirements shall be satisfied through use of
the following either alone or in combination.
(1) Parking Requirement Calculation. Parking Requirements shall be calculated for each
use within a development according to Table 26.515-1.
(2) Parking Provision Minimum. Applicable development shall satisfy the minimum Parking
Provision Requirement, as calculated in Table 26.515-1. Minimum parking provisions
may be reduced in combination with mobility measures and transportation system
impact fees in accordance with the standards in Table 26.515-2.
(3) Parking Provision Maximum. To create appropriate site planning and provision of
parking, applicable development shall not provide on-site parking in excess of one
hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of the Parking Provision Maximum requirement in
the form of Reserved Parking Spaces or Accessory Parking Spaces, unless the total
number of on-site spaces in excess of one hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of the
Parking Provision Maximum are provided as Public Parking Spaces.
26.515.050.a – On-Site Parking. Off-street parking may be provided on-site in applicable zone
districts to satisfy Parking Requirements, with Reserved and Accessory spaces not to exceed
the Parking Maximums outlined below in Table 26.515-1. Shared parking may be counted
provided that a Shared Parking Agreement and a shared-parking analysis, as approved by the
Community Development Director, is executed.
Table 26.515-1 Parking Impact Requirement Calculations [truncated]
Response – Two garage parking spaces are provided for the new home, meeting
the Land Use Code requirement. Additional area on the property may be used
for guest parking, service, delivery, or maneuvering. Please refer to attached
plans.
41
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
August 21, 2023
Haley Hart
Long-Range Planner
City of Aspen
457 Rio Grande Place
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 360 Lake Avenue; Lot 1, Erdman Partnership Lot Split
Supplemental Information
Ms. Hart:
Please accept this supplemental information to the Hallam Lake Bluff Review application
for 360 Lake Avenue. This supplement addresses referral agency comments from the
City’s Planning, Parks, and Engineering Departments.
Responses to Planning Comments:
1.Why is the parking plan included in the application? Please provide detail for the
reason on this submission. Response - We included the parking plan in response to
the pre-application conference summary that requested a parking plan. We are not
requesting any special parking consideration.
2.On page 48 of 114 (G.1.000) of the application, the lower level 1 floor area plan
shows an outline to the left of the existing basement. Based on the note ‘Egress well
continues to crawlspace’ and ‘Crawlspace above – less than 5’-6” clear height’ staff
is unsure if this is outlining crawlspace on the lower-level basement or if this is part of
the upper-level basement. If this is the lower-level basement, please provide
information on how this does not classify as an expansion of a non-conformity.
Response – There is a crawl space planned for underneath the upper-level
basement. This will be for various pieces of mechanical equipment and the elevator
pit. Access to the crawl space will be from the exterior through an egress well and
from the wall of the lower-level basement. These are access panels to be able to
service the mechanical equipment.
3.On L1-01 of the application, please provide detail on what the grey blocks are within
the 15’ Bluff Setback. Response - The grey blocks are existing. They represent large
tree trucks embedded into the hillside as deadman logs to stabilize the hillside.
These were installed when the bluff was reconstructed roughly 10 years ago. There
are no proposed changes to these.
Exhibit A1.1
42
360 Lake Ave HLB
Supplement 8-21-23
Page 2
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
Responses to Parks Comments:
1. The applicant has identified and has satisfied the standards through Section
26.435.060.
2. The Parks Department concludes the proposed landscape plan submitted includes
native vegetative screening of no less than fifty percent 50% of the development as
viewed from the rear (slope) of the parcel.
3. The Parks Department supports the proposed landscape treatment at-grade within
the 15-foot setback from the top of slope to screen the structure or development in
the setback from all adjoining properties.
4. Proposed Lawn detail within 30’ setback to be WELS compliant turf/grass mix.
5. The applicant has confirmed the landscape installations are to be maintained in
perpetuity and failed planting(s) shall be replaced in-kind.
Response – The Parks Department comments are accepted.
Responses to Engineering Comments:
1. Add Pre-Development Grade request to the beginning of the Land Use case to make
it more evident that it is part of the list of requests. Response – This has been added
to the cover letter.
2. There are discrepancies in the storage volume requirement listed for WQCV. On
page 4 of the Drainage Report it is listed as 213 cubic feet. In the table on page 6 of
the Drainage Report it is listed as 265 cubic feet. Response – Please refer updated
drainage report.
3. Include the Top of Bluff and Top of Bluff setback on all civil engineering plan sheets
for reference. The stormwater system must meet all Top of Bluff and Top of Bluff
setback requirements. Response – The Top-of-Bluff and ToB setback have been
added to the civil sheets.
4. Provide a utility plan for 360 Lake Avenue. Response – Please refer to updated
utility plan.
5. Show existing utilities that have been installed more clearly. Response – Please refer
to updated utility layouts in the civil set.
6. Only one water service tap is permitted per parcel. A maximum of 4.0 EC Us is
permitted for a single-family residence. Response – The applicant understands this
limitation.
7. Label the topographic lines on the Special Topographic Exhibit. Response – This
exhibit has been updated.
43
360 Lake Ave HLB
Supplement 8-21-23
Page 3
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
8. Provide the recordation number for the building envelopes delineated on Civil Plan
sheet C2. If no building envelope exists, list setbacks appropriately. Response – The
setbacks have been updated on civil sheet C2.
9. Ensure that the snowmelt driveway will not be over the water service line. Response
– Water service lines are private facilities and the responsibility of the homeowner.
These are routinely located beneath snowmelt or other improvements that remain at-
risk if the owner must replace the service line. The design team is not aware of a
requirement in the water distribution standards that states that a service line cannot
be under a snowmelt system. The water service has been proposed in a location
where it will avoid the storm drain.
Kind Regards,
Chris Bendon, AICP
BendonAdams LLC
44
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist - Single Family and Duplex
Standard Complies Alternative
Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes
B.1.Articulation of Building Mass
(Non-flexible)
B.2.Building Orientation
(Flexible)
B.3.Build-to Requirement
(Flexible)
B.4.One Story Element
(Flexible)
C.1.Garage Access
(Non-flexible)
C.2.Garage Placement
(Non-flexible)
C.3.Garage Dimensions
(Flexible)
Instructions: Please fill out the checklist below, marking whether the proposed design complies with the applicable standard as written or is requesting Alternative Compliance (only
permitted for Flexible standards). Also include the sheet #(s) demonstrating the applicable standard. If a standard does not apply, please mark N/A and include in the Notes section why
it does not apply. If Alternative Compliance is requested for a Flexible standard, include in the Notes section how the proposed design meets the intent of the standard(s). Additional
sheets/graphics may be attached.
Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the
applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review.
Address:
Parcel ID:
Zone District/PD:
Representative:
Email:
Phone:
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A2
45
Standard Complies Alternative
Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes
C.4.Garage Door Design
(Flexible)
D.1.Entry Connection
(Non-flexible)
D.2.Door Height
(Flexible)
D.3.Entry Porch
(Flexible)
E.1.Principle Window
(Flexible)
E.2.Window Placement
(Flexible)
E.3.Nonorthogonal Window Limit
(Flexible)
E.4.Lightwell/Stairwell Location
(Flexible)
E.5.Materials
(Flexible)
Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the
applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review.
Page 2 of 2
Residential Design Standards
Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist - Single Family and Duplex
46
Exhibit A3
47
- VICINITY MAP -
SCALE: 1 Inch = 2000 Feet
Site
Lot 2
Erdman Partnership
Lot Split
Plat Book 25, Page 42
0.204 acres +/-
Lot 1
Erdman Partnership
Lot Split
Plat Book 25, Page 42
0.550 acres +/-
1
2 34
5678
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 27 28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
3940 4142
43 44
45
46
47 48 49 50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
5859
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71
72
73
74 75 76 77
78
79
80 8182
83
84
Approved:
Graphic Scale
In U.S. Feet : 1" = 20'
0 10 20 40
Special
Topographic
Exhibit
2016-155.004
AO
January 26, 2023
SH
230111-350-360LakeAve_SpecialTopoExhibit.dwg
1
1
--PLS:
Scott A. Hemmen
Colorado PLS # 38182
For, and on behalf of SGM
Sp
e
c
i
a
l
T
o
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
Ci
t
y
o
f
A
s
p
e
n
Pi
t
k
i
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
C
o
l
o
r
a
d
o
Special Topographic Exhibit
350 & 360 Lake Avenue, City of Aspen
Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian
Pitkin County, Colorado
Exhibit A4
48
1
Drainage Memo
360 LAKE AVENUE
ASPEN, CO
COMMENT RESPONSE:
August 16, 2023
Prepared by
Richard Goulding
Roaring Fork Engineering
592 Highway 133
Carbondale, CO 81623
49
2
Table of Contents
1.0 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................. 3
2.0 Proposed Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 4
3.0 Offsite Drainage Basin ............................................................................................................................ 4
4.0 Onsite Drainage Basin ............................................................................................................................ 4
4.0.1 WQCV Storage and Drywell Calculations ...................................................................................... 6
5.0 Appendix ................................................................................................................................................. 7
5.0.1 COA Drainage Analysis and Design ............................................................................................... 7
5.0.2 Drainage Basins Exhibit................................................................................................................... 8
50
3
1.0 Existing Conditions
The property at 360 Lake Avenue, parcel number 273512132001 is located in Aspen, Colorado
on the West End of the City, six blocks north of Main Street within the City limits. The site had
an existing structure with an approximate footprint of 6,747.63 square feet. The parcel is
surrounded by heavy vegetation. The vegetation includes Aspen and Junipers trees, and shrubs.
The site is located next to Hallam Lake with Hallam Lake being approximately 82 ft southeast of
the property. The site appears to be under construction.
Hallam Lake is part of a nature preserve that is directly behind the parcel, with the Roaring Fork
River running through the preserve. Neighboring the parcel are homes to the north, south, and
west of the property. The site itself is relatively flat, however, the topography appears to slope
downward from the flat site, west, to Hallam Lake and the wetlands, east. Generally, the site
slopes between 5% and 20%. Steeper slopes do exist on the site and approach about 50%
southwest of the site.
A geotechnical report was developed by Kumar & Associates, Inc. on September 27, 2019.
Three boring samples were taken. The subsoils were below 3 ½ feet of sand and gravel for the
first boring. The second and third borings had 1-1 ½ feet of topsoil and consisted of about 20 feet
of medium dense silty sand and gravel with cobbles and possible boulders. The classification of
the soil type is B. No free water was observed during the drilling.
Vicinity of 360 Lake Avenue Property
51
4
2.0 Proposed Conditions
The 360 Lake Avenue property is 23,834.16 square feet (sf), or 0.5472 acres. The 360 Lake
Avenue lot will have a main residence, with a garage, a hot tub, and a pool. The main residence
will consist of three levels.
The project site will disturb more than 1000 sf and more than 25% of the site, and therefore is
categorized as a ‘Major Project’ according to Table 1.1 of the Urban Runoff Management Plan
(URMP. Specifically, the development will disturb approximately 11,268.18 sf, which is about
47.28% of the site. Because this site is considered a ‘Major Project’ that is connected to COA’s
storm system, the Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) will be used to size the drywells for
stormwater detention. The proposed storm system is within the Aspen Mountain drainage basin
and will ultimately discharge into the COA’s storm water system.
3.0 Offsite Drainage Basin
The Offsite Basin consists of most of the West End neighborhood. The Offsite Basin was
previously studied beginning in 2009 as the West End neighborhood drains to the property. The
property is adjacent to the West End Outfall the offsite basin low point within the area.
Infrastructure was designed, sized, and built between 2014-2016, in which RFE was involved.
The bluff leading to Hallam Lake was reconstructed as part of the new design, and a stormwater
system was installed for the COA through the property. There is a series of swales, inlets, and
culverts in the Lake Avenue Right-of-Way that collect the Offsite Basin and convey the storm
water through the property via a 24” COA reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) that daylights at the
bluff, discharging into Hallam Lake.
There will be a proposed connection from the property’s drywells to the 24” COA RCP storm
pipe. The drywells will collect the runoff from the roofs, the driveway, patios, walkways, a hot
tub, and pool. The drywells connection will overflow to the Hallam Lake via the 24” COA RCP
pipe east of the property.
Please refer to section 5.0 Appendix of this report for the Offsite Basin Exhibit with
calculations.
4.0 Onsite Drainage Basin
For the Onsite Basin the site storm infrastructure is required to convey the 10-year and 100-year
storm events into the COA’s storm water system and detain the WQCV. The water that will be
conveyed for both storm events will make its way through the COA’s 24” RCP that will
ultimately discharge to Hallam Lake east of the property. The WQCV storage required for this
property is 266 cubic feet (cf). See section 4.0.1 WQCV Storage and Drywell Calculations for
reference.
52
5
The Rational Method was used to calculate the Onsite Basin peak flows for both the 10-year and
100-year storm events. The Rational Method is an acceptable method to calculate runoff for this
basin because the total area is under 90 acres. Rainfall intensity was calculated using the Time of
Concentration (Td) of 5 minutes. The 1-hour rainfall depths (P1) used for these calculations were
taken from Table 2.3 of the URMP, and are equal to 0.77 inches for the 10-year storm event and
1.23 inches for the 100-year storm event.
Equation 2.1 was referenced when solving for the Rainfall Intensity (I).
𝑰ൌ 𝟖𝟖.𝟖 𝑷𝟏
ሺ𝟏𝟎 𝑻𝒅ሻ𝟏.𝟎𝟓𝟐 ሺ𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2.1ሻ
Runoff Coefficients (C), a function of the Soil Group (in this case B for the basins) and the
percentage of impervious area were developed using Figure 3.3. The Runoff Coefficient (C) was
then multiplied by the Rainfall Intensity (I) and the area of the calculated basin (A, in acres) to
determine the peak discharge.
𝑸𝒑ൌ𝑪𝑰𝑨
𝑄 ൌ𝑃𝑒𝑎𝑘 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 ሺ𝑐𝑓𝑠ሻ
𝐶 ൌ 𝑅𝑢𝑛𝑜𝑓𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡
𝐼ൌ𝑅𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 ሺ𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟ሻ
𝐴ൌ𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 ሺ𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠ሻ
These peak flow values were used to calculate the capacity required of the conveyance
structures, such as the inlets, pipes, and drywell units. The tables below contain the peak flows
for developed conditions for the 10-year and 100-year storm events for the Onsite Basin.
10 Year Peak Discharge Developed Calculations
1 Hour(P1)0.77
Return Period 10
Property Name Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
360 Lake Ave.1 (360) 23834.16 11268.18 47.28% 0.422 5 3.96 0.91
10 Year Peak Discharge Pre Development Calculations
1 Hour(P1)0.77
Return Period 10
Property Name Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
360 Lake Ave.1 (360) 23834.16 0.00 0.00% 0.057 5 3.96 0.12
53
6
4.0.1 WQCV Storage and Drywell Calculations
The property at 360 Lake Avenue is located within the Aspen commercial core and therefore it is
required to meet the capacity design for the 10-year and 100-year historical storm events for both
onsite and offsite drainage. Additionally, the required drywell storage must be calculated using
the WQCV for the 360 Lake Avenue property.
The Onsite Basin at 360 Lake is assumed to be 47.28% impervious for this calculation.
Therefore, given the impervious percentage, the calculated value for watershed inches is
approximately 0.090. The 0.090 watershed inches value was taken from Figure 8.13 in the
URMP.
The WQCV was determined using the following equation.
𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 ሺ𝑓𝑡ଷሻ ൌ 𝑊𝑄𝐶𝑉 𝑖𝑛 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 ∗ 1 𝑓𝑡
12 𝑖𝑛∗𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 ሺ𝑠𝑓ሻ
The required WQCV storage for 360 Lake Avenue is approximately 265 cf. Therefore, the
designed drywell storage was calculated to have a storage capacity of 325 cf, well above the
required WQCV storage requirement.
100 Year Peak Discharge Developed Calculations
1 Hour(P1)1.23
Return Period 100
Property Name Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
360 Lake Ave. 1 (360) 23834.16 11268.18 47.28% 0.638 5 6.33 2.21
100 Year Peak Discharge Pre Development Calculations
1 Hour(P1)1.23
Return Period 100
Property Name Basin ID Total Area Imp. Area Impervious C Value Time of CIntensityQ Max
See(D1) (ft
2)(ft2)(%)From Table (Td) I=88.8P1/(10+Td)1.052 (ft3/sec)
360 Lake Ave. 1 (360) 23834.16 11268.18 0.00% 0.426 5 6.33 1.47
Water Quality Capture Volume Storage
Basin Total Area Impervious Area Impervious WQCV Table Value WQCV Storage F.O.S. Required Storage BMP
(#) (ft
2)(ft2)(%) (in) (ft
3)(ft3)
1 (360) 23834.16 11268.18 47.28% 0.089 176.77 1.5 265.2 Drywell 1
Drywell Storage
Drywell Basins Diameter Storage Depth Perforated Depth Internal Volume External (18" of Screened Rock) Volume Total Capacity Required Capacity
(Name) (#) D (ft) H (ft) P (ft)π*H*(D/2)2) (ft3)0.3*π*P*((D/2)+1.5)2 ‐ (D/2)2) (ft3)(ft3)(ft3)
360 Lake Ave 1 6 10 4 283 42 325 265
54
7
5.0 Appendix
5.0.1 COA Drainage Analysis and Design
55
78
8
0
7
8
7
5
78
3
0
7890
7885
7880
78
4
0
7880
7
8
4
5
790
0
78
9
5
78
7
0
7
8
3
5
7860
7
8
6
5
7
8
5
5
7
9
0
0
79
0
0
789
0
7885
78
9
5
7
8
5
0
7880
7
8
3
5
79
0
0
79
0
0
7
9
0
0
78
9
5
7
8
7
5
7870
7880
7
8
7
5
7
8
8
0
789
0
7890
7
8
2
0
78
8
0
7
8
7
5
788
0
79
0
0
7885
7
8
2
5
78
7
5
7
8
4
0
7
8
4
5
78
3
5
7
8
5
0
78
8
0
78
4
5
GILLESPIE ST
N 7
T
H
S
T
N
6
T
H
S
T
N
2
N
D
S
T
N
5
T
H
S
T
N
4
T
H
S
T
N
3
R
D
S
T
N
1
S
T
S
T
PEARL CT
W NO
R
T
H
S
T
W SM
U
G
G
L
E
R
S
T
W FR
A
N
C
I
S
S
T
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
BASIN 2
A=14.1 acres
C=0.460
TOC=33.99 min
Q100=13.23 cfs
BASIN 1
A=25.6 acres
C=0.460
TOC=33.13 min
Q100=24.52 cfs
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
DA
T
E
NU
M
-
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
-
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
JOB #:
CHECKED BY:
56
8
5.0.2 Drainage Basins Exhibit
57
2% >
<
1
%
5.5% >
< 1.4%
2%
>
3% >
2.
6
%
>
< 2%
< 2%
2% >
2% >
2% >
<
1
.
7
%
<
2
.
6
%
< 2%
2.2% >
2% >
2% >
2% >
2% >
2% >
2% >
2% >
C1
DRAINAGE BASINS
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
KGB
35
0
-
3
6
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
02
.
0
1
.
2
0
2
3
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
B
A
S
I
N
S
L
A
Y
O
U
T
1
58
C0
360 LAKE AVE COVER
360 LAKE AVENUE RESIDENCE
ASPEN, CO
100% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
59
C2
EXISTING CONDITIONS
N
W E
S
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
60
C4
EROSION CONTROL
DETAILS
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
61
C5
UTILITY DETAILS
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
62
C6
DRAINAGE DETAILS
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
63
C7
PAVEMENT DETAILS
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
64
C8
UTILITY DEMO PLAN
N
W E
S
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
65
C9
360 SITE LAYOUT
N
W E
S
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
66
C10
360 DRIVEWAY P&P
N
W E
S
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
67
C11
360 UTILITY PLAN
N
W E
S
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
68
N
W E
S
360 LAKE STORM SYSTEM
C12
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
69
2.
6
%
>
< 2%
< 2%
2% >
2% >
68
.
5
69.50
69.71
68.53
68
.
5
0
TS
6
8
.
5
FG
6
6
.
0
8
69.50
TD 7869.261.8% >
<
2
.
6
%
< 1.8%
2% >
TW 73.00
BS
6
8
.
7
9
MH 7864.90
2.2% >
68.37
2% >
FG
6
6
.
0
8
FG
6
6
.
4
4
68
.
2
0
68
.
5
8
TS
7
0
.
2
6
FG
6
6
.
4
4
68.20
68.50
68.50
2%
>
68.50
69.50
69.5069.50
69.30
69.30
69.50
TW 70.0
69.3569.35
69.50
TW 69.35
TS
6
8
.
0
1
TS
6
7
.
5
2
TS
6
7
.
0
3
BS
6
6
.
5
4
TS 69.00
TS 69.50
TS 70.00
TS 70.50
68
.
5
68
.
5
68.62
2% >
BS 69.96
TS 70.38
69.50
69.47
C13
360 LAKE GRADING PLAN
N
W E
S
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
70
C14
N
W E
S
360 LAKE WATER SERVICE
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
71
C15
360 LAKE SANITARY SEWER
N
W E
S
CHECKED BY:
#
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
CONSTRUCTION
DRAWN BY:
JOB # 2022-08
NOT FOR
RO
A
R
I
N
G
F
O
R
K
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
59
2
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
1
3
3
CA
R
B
O
N
D
A
L
E
,
C
O
8
1
6
2
3
PH
:
(
9
7
0
)
3
4
0
-
4
1
3
0
RBG
TRS
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
25
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
50
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
10
0
%
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
1 2 3
DA
T
E
05
.
2
6
.
2
0
2
3
06
.
2
2
.
2
0
2
3
07
.
2
1
.
2
0
2
3
KE
B
KE
B
KE
B
72
01
02
VEGETATION
REMOVAL &
PROTECTION PLAN
C
DATE#DESCRIPTION
ISSUE DATE:
SHEET NUMBER
REVIEWED:
PROJECT NUMBER:
DRAWN:
1
REVISIONS
7005
2 3 4 5 6 7
A
B
C
D
E
MC
K
E
L
V
E
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
C O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C.
HALLAM LAKE
BLUFF REVIEW
F
8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M
M
a
r
1
0
,
2
0
2
3
-
3
:
3
8
p
m
F:
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
_
A
-
L
\
7
0
0
5
-
3
5
0
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
\
D
-
C
A
D
\
0
2
.
S
h
e
e
t
s
\
P
Z
\
7
0
0
5
-
D
W
-
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
d
w
g
DESIGN WORKSHOP
Landscape Architecture · Land Planning
Urban Design · Tourism Planning
Asheville · Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Dubai
Houston · Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Shanghai
1390 Lawrence Street
Denver, Colorado 80204
(303) 623-5186
Suite 100
Facsimile (303) 623-2260
L1-01
AN BB, MA
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
LIMIT OF WOR
K
LIM
I
T
O
F
W
O
R
K
PROPERTY LINE
LIMIT OF WORK
30' R
E
A
R
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
20' SIDE YARD SETBACK
20
'
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
10
'
F
R
O
N
T
YA
R
D
SE
T
B
A
C
K
EXISTING BASEMENT STRUCTURE
TYP.
TYP.2
TYP.1
11.1
1 Existing tree to remain, do not disturb. Protect in place.
2 Existing tree to be removed.
PLANT PROTECTION AND REMOVAL REFERENCE NOTES
3 Clear and grub existing vegetation and all roots.
PROTECTION FENCING RELATED
DETAILS
11 PROTECTION FENCING
11.1 Tree Protection Fence
SPEC.
SECTION
DETAIL /
SHEET
1 / L1-01
Vegetation to be cleared
PLANT PROTECTION AND REMOVAL LEGEND
Deciduous tree to remain
Coniferous tree to remain
Tree to be removed
TYP.3
1 TREE PROTECTION FENCE
1/2" = 1'-0"
11.1
METAL POST
PLASTIC MESH FENCE
FENCING ALIGNED W/ TREE DRIPLINE.
DRIPLINE IS DETERMINED BY TAKING THE
LONGEST BRANCH OF THE TREE AND
USING THAT AS THE DRIPLINE EXTENT.
EXISTING GRADE
NOTES:
* IF ACCESS IS NEEDED INSIDE OF THE TREE PROTECTION FENCING,
A MULCH BED WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE ACCESS PATH
6'
-
0
"
(P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
)
NORTH 0
ORIGINAL SCALE:
5' 10'20'
1"=10'
TO
P
O
F
B
L
U
F
F
15
'
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30
'
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
TREE # TYPE SIZE (CAL. IN.)CONDITION
1 Evergreen
TREE REMOVAL CHART
2 Evergreen
TBD
TBD
In Decline*
In Decline*
*As of 02/17/2023 the arborist was unable to fully assess the condition of this tree in the tree
survey report due to site conditions and constraints. The arborist's findings concluded that
this tree is declining due to root loss from previous excavations and that this tree will not
withstand further impacts from construction. The arborist noted that this tree should be
considered for removal. This analysis was provided in a tree survey report by Chris Forman
on behalf of Aspen Tree Service dated 02/17/2023.
1. No cutting or pruning branches on trees that are being protected.
2. Verify the location of items to be removed prior to the commencement of the work.
3. Minimize excavation and earthwork within tree's dripline. City of Aspen Forester to give direction for excavation during the
building permit process.
4. Trees being removed shall be chipped and used as mulch on-site where possible.
TREE PROTECTION NOTES
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
LI
M
I
T
O
F
W
O
R
K
20
'
W
I
D
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
A
N
D
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
Exhibit A7
73
LANDSCAPE
CHARACTER
PLAN
C
DATE#DESCRIPTION
ISSUE DATE:
SHEET NUMBER
REVIEWED:
PROJECT NUMBER:
DRAWN:
1
REVISIONS
7005
2 3 4 5 6 7
A
B
C
D
E
MC
K
E
L
V
E
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
L
O
R
A
D
O
C O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C.
HALLAM LAKE
BLUFF REVIEW
F
8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M
M
a
r
1
0
,
2
0
2
3
-
3
:
3
5
p
m
F:
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
_
A
-
L
\
7
0
0
5
-
3
5
0
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
\
D
-
C
A
D
\
0
2
.
S
h
e
e
t
s
\
P
Z
\
7
0
0
5
-
D
W
-
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
C
H
A
R
A
C
T
E
R
.
d
w
g
DESIGN WORKSHOP
Landscape Architecture · Land Planning
Urban Design · Tourism Planning
Asheville · Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Dubai
Houston · Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Shanghai
1390 Lawrence Street
Denver, Colorado 80204
(303) 623-5186
Suite 100
Facsimile (303) 623-2260
L3-01
AN BB, MA
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
TO
P
O
F
B
L
U
F
F
15
'
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30
'
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
LI
M
I
T
O
F
W
O
R
K
LIMIT OF WOR
K
LIM
I
T
O
F
W
O
R
K
PROPERTY LINE
LIMIT OF WORK
30' R
E
A
R
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
20' SIDE YARD SETBACK
20
'
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
10
'
F
R
O
N
T
YA
R
D
SE
T
B
A
C
K
SITE KEYNOTES:RELATED
DETAILS
1.0 PAVEMENTS, RAMPS, CURBS
1.1 Stone Paving (Snowmelt)
1.2 Vehicular Cobble Stone Paving (Snowmelt)
2.0 JOINTING
NOT NOTED AT THIS TIME
3.0 STEPS
5.0 SITE FURNITURE
5.1 Fire Feature, Type 1
5.2 Fire Feature, Type 2
6.0 RAILINGS, BARRIERS, FENCING
7.0 SITE LIGHTING
8.0 DRAINAGE
9.0 PLANTING AND LANDSCAPE
10.0 MISCELLANEOUS ELEMENTS
10.1 Landscape Boulder
SPEC.
SECTION
DETAIL /
SHEET
4.0
SITE WALLS/EMBANKMENTS
1.3
4.1
4.2
Stone Wall, Type 1
4.3
Stone Wall, Type 2
1.4
6.1 Dog Run Fence
Crusher Fines
Synthetic Turf
3.1 Stone Slab Steps, Type 1
3.2 Stone Slab Steps, Type 2
3.3 Stone Slab Steps, Type 3
Seat Wall
4.4
Area Drain8.1
6.2 Dog Run Fence Gate
6.3 Fence
6.4 Gate
10.2
10.3
Spa
Pool
Boulder Retaining Wall
8.2 Slot Drain
7.1 Step Light
7.2 Path light
7.3 Down light
7.4 Wall light
7.5
SEE LEGEND BELOW
7.6
Wall Mounted Downlight
Trellis Light
1.5 Raised Stone Curb
3.1
1.5
1.2
4.1
10.1
TYP.
8.2
6.2
6.1
1.4
10.2
4.3
5.2
10.3
10.1
TYP.
5.1
TYP.3.2
4.2
3
1
2
6.3
6.4
4
1 Building overhang. Refer to Architecture.
2 Architectural column. Refer to Architecture.
SITE REFERENCE NOTES
3 Skylight. Refer to Architecture.
4 Existing manhole. Protect in place.
5 Existing tree to remain. Do not disturb. Protect in place.
6 Existing storm water outfall. Protect in place.
7 Existing storm water infrastructure to remain.
8 Extents of existing foundation below.
TYP.
3.3
5 TYP.
Synthetic turf
MATERIALS LEGEND
Vehicular cobble stone paving - snowmelt
Crusher fines
Stone paving - snowmelt
Lawn
PLANTING LEGEND
Existing Coniferous Tree to Remain
Proposed Deciduous Tree (Aspen)
Existing Deciduous Tree to Remain
Planting Type 1 - Perennial Area
Planting Type 2 - Shrub Area
Planting Type 3 - Native Vegetation Planting
(40% Perennial, 30% Shrub, 30% Groundcover)
(40% Shrub, 40% Ornamental Grass, 20% Perennial)
NORTH 0
ORIGINAL SCALE:
5' 10'20'
1"=10'
TYP.
4.4
TYP.7.1
TYP.7.4
TYP.
7.3
TYP.1.1
TYP.7.2
TYP.7.4
6
7
8.1
78
6
6
'
78
6
5
'
78
6
7
'
78
6
8
'
78
6
9
'
7868'
7867'
78
6
6
'
78
7
0
'
7
8
7
0
'
TYP.
7.5
TYP.
7.6
SITE LIGHTING
7.1 Step Light 7.2 Path Light 7.3 Downlight 7.4 Wall Light 7.5 Wall Mounted
Downlight
7.6 Trellis Light
20
'
W
I
D
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
A
N
D
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
TYP.
TYP.
1.5
TYP.1.3
7869'
8
TYP.7.1
7.5
TYP.
7.5
TYP.
74
ENLARGED DETAIL NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
DETAIL NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
SECTION/ELEVATION NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
INTERIOR ELEVATION NUMBERS
SHEET NUMBER
WINDOW SYMBOL
DOOR SYMBOL
GRID LINE
ROOM NAME
ROOM NUMBER
REVISION
FLOOR ELEVATION
OR DIMENSION POINT
A101
1 Ref
1Re
f
1 Ref
1Re
f
0-00
A101
1 SIM
A101
1 SIM
0
2
FINISH SCHED.
ROOM
101
WALL, FLOOR, CEILING, ROOF
ASSEMBLY TYPEX1
?Finish
1
A101
SIM
0-00
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/2" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:42 AM
A.1.000
COVER SHEET
22011
Author
Checker
PROJECT ADDRESS:
360 LAKE AVE, ASPEN, CO 81611
PAREL ID: 273512132001
ZONE: R-6 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
NEW CONSTRUCTION HOUSE WITH GARAGE WITH 2 SUBGRADE LEVELS.
SITEWORK WITH A POOL AND SPA
CONSTRUCTION TYPE:
VB
NUMBER OF STORIES:
3 - 1 LEVEL ABOVE GRADE, 2 LEVELS SUBGRADE (LL1 AND LL2)
LL1 IS AN EXISTING LEGALLY ESTABLISHED NON-CONFORMITY
AREA:
PROPOSED FLOOR AREA: 4,419 SF
ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: 4,468 SF
ENERGY COMPLIANCE PATH:
PERSCRIPTIVE COMPLIANCE (R401.2.1)
DEFERRED SUBMITTALS:
SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT,
ELECTRICAL ENGINEER (ALARM) AND MECHANICAL ENGINEER FOR
DESIGN REVIEW; ONCE APPROVED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT
THE SHOP DRAWINGS TO THE LOCAL FIRE AUTHORITY FOR APPROVAL
PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
TRUSS DESIGN DRAWINGS TO BE PROVIDED TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL
AND APPROVED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION - PER 2021 IBC, SECTION 2303.4
#Pound or Number
&And
(E)Existing
(N)New
@ At
A.C.Air Conditioning or Asphalt
Concrete
A.D.Area Drain
A.F.F. Above Finish Floor
A.S.R.B. Architectural Site Review Board
ACOUS. Acoustical
ADJ.Adjustable
ADJAC. Adjacent
AGGR. Aggregate
ALT.Alternate
ALUM. Aluminum
APPROX. Approximate
ARCH. Architectural
ASPH. Asphalt
B.O.Bottom of
B.P.Building Paper
BD.Board
BITUM. Bituminous
BLDG. Building
BLK.Block
BLKG. Blocking
BM.Beam
BOT Bottom
BTWN. Between
C.B.Catch Basin
C.J.Control Joint
C.M.U. Concrete Masonry Unit
C.O.Clean Out
C.T.Ceramic Tile
C.W.Curtain Wall
CEM. Cement
CER. Ceramic
CLG.Ceiling
CLKG. Caulking
PROJECT DIRECTORY
PROJECT INFOVICINITY MAP
PROJECT VIEW DRAWING INDEXSYMBOLSGENERAL NOTES
1. The work included under this contract consist of all labor materials, transportation, tools and
equipment necessary for the construction of the project leaving all work ready for use.
2. All construction shall conform to the 2021 International Building Code; 2021 International
Residential Code; 2021 International Mechanical, Plumbing and Fire Codes; 2021
International Fuel Gas Code; 2020 National Electric Code; 2021 International Energy Code;
Fire Saftey Standards and any other local governing codes and ordinances. In the event of
conflict, the most stringent requirements shall apply.
3. The plans indicate the general extent of new construction necessary for the work, but are not
intended to be all-inclusive. All demolition and all new work necessary to allow for a finished
job in accordance with the intention of the drawing is included regardless of whether shown on
the drawings or mentioned in the notes. All work is new, U.O.N.
4. Any errors, omissions or conflicts found in the various parts of the construction documents
shall be brought to the attention of the Architect and the Owner for clarification before
proceeding with the work.
5. The General Contractor shall maintain a current and complete set of the construction
documents on the job site during all phases of construction for use of all the trades and shall
provide all the subcontractors with current construction documents as required.
6. The General Contractor shall verify and assume responsibility for all dimensions and site
conditions. The General Contractor shall inspect the existing premises and take note of
existing conditions prior to submitting prices. No claim shall be allowed for difficulties
encountered which could have reasonably been inferred from such examination.
7. Written dimensions take precedence. Do not scale drawings.
8. All dimensions to and from new construction when shown in plan are to face of stud, face of
masonry, centerline, unless otherwise noted.
9. All dimensions on reflected ceiling or electrical plans are from face of finish or center line of
column to center line of fixture or group of fixtures.
10. All vertical dimensions are to face of finish, finish floor, unless otherwise noted.
11. All dimensions noted "Verify" and "V.I.F." are to be checked by contractor prior to construction.
Immediately report any variances to the architect for resolution.
12. Interior walls are 2x4 or 2x6 wood studs @ 16" o.c. unless otherwise noted and all exterior
wall are 2x6 wood studs @ 16" o.c. unless otherwise noted.
13. Contractor shall provide all seismic bracing and hold-down clips as required by Code for all
suspended ceiling and soffit framing conditions.
14. Coordinate all work with existing conditions, including but not limited to: irrigation pipes,
electrical conduit, water lines, gas lines, drainage lines, etc.
15. Provide adequate temporary support as necessary to assure the structural value or integrity of
the building.
16. Protect all existing building and site conditions to remain including walls, cabinets, finishes,
trees and shrubs, paving, etc.
17. Details shown are typical. Similar details apply in similar conditions.
18. Verify all architectural details with structural, and design/build drawings before ordering or
installation of any work.
19. Where locations of windows and doors are not dimensioned, they shall be centered in the wall
or placed two stud widths from adjacent wall as indicated on the drawings.
20. All required exits shall be operable from inside, without the use of key or special knowledge.
21. All changes in floor materials occur at centerline of door or framed opening unless otherwise
indicated on the drawings.
22. Install all fixtures, equipment and materials per manufacturer's recommendations.
23. Verify clearances for flues, vents, chases, soffits, fixtures, etc. before any construction,
ordering of, or installation of any items of work.
24. Sealant, caulking and flashing, etc. locations shown on drawings are not intended to be
inclusive. Follow manufacturer's installation recommendations and standard industry and
building practices.
25. All roof deck penetrations and exterior wall openings shall be guaranteed by the contractor to
be water tight for a minimum period of one year after substantial completion of all work under
this contract.
26. The General Contractor shall remove all rubbish and waste materials of all subcontractors and
trades on a regular basis, and shall exercise a strict control over job cleaning to prevent any
direct debris or dust from affecting, in any way, finished areas in or outside job site.
27. Contractor shall leave premises and all affected areas clean and orderly, ready for occupancy.
This includes cleaning of all glass (inside and outside) and frames, both new and existing.
28. Install smoke detectors in accordance with the specifications and in conformance with local
Fire Marshal requirements.
29. All exterior doors and windows are to be weather stripped unless otherwise noted in door
details.
30. Glass subject to human impact shall be of safety glazing material to meet State and Federal
requirements.
31. Any survey monuments within the area of construction shall be preserved or reset by a
registered civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor.
32. Provide shop drawings for all millwork, metal work and custom items.
33. Contractor is responsible for reviewing and complying with requirements of Soil Report as
prepared by Geotechnical Engineer.
34. All exterior doors to meet .28 and windows to meet .26 U-value per City of Aspen R402.1
35. Existing improvements shown on sheets A.1.208, A.1.209, and A.1.409 reflect representations
depicted within Permit No. 0023.2016.ARBK
ABBREVIATIONS
CLOS. Closet
CLR.Clear
CNTR. Counter
COL.Column
CONC. Concrete
COND. Condition
CONN. Connection
CONST. Construction
CONT. Continuous
CONTR. Counter
CTR.Center
D Data/Phone
D.F.Drinking Fountain
D.S.Down Spout
D.W.Dishwasher
DBL.Double
DET.Detail
DIA.Diameter
DIM.Angle
DISP. Dispenser
DN.Down
DR.Door
DWG. Drawing
DWR. Drawer
E.East
E.I.F.S. Exterior Insulation and Finish
System
E.J.Expansion Joint
E.P.B. Electrical Panel Board
EA.Each
EL.Elevation
ELEC. Electrical
EMER. Emergency
ENCL. Enclosure
EQ.Equal
EQUIP. Equipment
EXIST. Existing
EXP.Expansion
EXR Existing to Remain
EXT.Exterior
F.A.Fire Alarm
F.A.U. Forced Air Unit
F.B.Flat Bar
F.D.Floor Drain
F.E.C. Fire Extinguisher Cabinet
F.H.M.S. Flat Head Machine Screw
F.H.W.S. Flat Head Wood Screw
F.O.C. Face of Concrete
F.O.F. Face of Finish
F.O.Ply Face of Plywood
F.O.S. Face of Stud
F.P.Fireplace
F.P.R.F. Fireproof
FIN.Finish
FIXT. Fixture
FLASH. Flashing
FLR.Floor
FLUOR. Fluorescent
FR.Frame
FT.Feet
FTG.Footing
FURR. Furring
FUT.Future
G.Gas Outlet
G.D.Garbadge Disposal
G.F.C.I. Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter
G.S.M. Galvanized Sheet Metal
G.W.Glass Washer
GA.Gauge
GALV. Galvanized
GEN. General
GL.Glass
GND. Ground
GR.Grade
GYP. Gypsum
H.B.Hose Bibb
H.C.Hollow Core or Handicapped
H.M.Hollow Metal
H.R.Hand Rail
HD.Head
HDBD. Hardboard
HDR. Header
HDW. Hardware
HDWD. Hardwood
HGR. Hanger
HGT. Height
HORIZ. Horizontal
HR.Hour
I.D.Inside Diameter
IN.Inch
INSUL. Insulation
INT.Interior
INTER. Intermediate
JAN.Janitor
JST.Joist
JT.Joint
KIT.Kitchen
LAM.Laminate
LAV.Lavatory
LB.Pound
LIN.Linear
LN.Line
LT.Light
M.B.Machine Bolt
M.C.Medicine Cabinet
M.D.O. Medium Density Overlay
MACH. Machine
MAINT. Maintain
MAT. Material
MAX. Maximum
MECH. Mechanical
MEMB. Membrane
MFR. Manufacturer
MIN.Minimum
MISC. Miscellaneous
MTD. Mounted
MTL.Metal
MUL. Mullion
N.North
N.I.C. Not in Contract
N.T.S. Not to Scale
NO.Number
NOM. Nominal
O.A.Overall
O.C.On Center
O.D.Outside Diameter
o/Over
OPNG. Opening
OPP. Opposite
P.LAM. Plastic Laminate
P.S.I. Per Square Inch
P.T.Pressure Treated or Post
Tensioned
P.T.D. Paper Towel Dispenser
P.T.R. Paper Towel Receptical
PERIM. Perimeter
PL.Plate
PLAS. Plaster
PLYWD. Plywood
PNL.Panel
PNT.Part
PT.Paint
PTN.Partition
Q.T.Quarry Tile
R.Riser
R.A.Return Air
R.O.Rough Opening
RAD. Radius
REC. Recessed
REF.Referenced
REFL. Reflected
REFR. Refrigerator
REG. Register
REINF. Reinforced
REMOV. Removable
REQ. Required
RESIL. Resilient
RET.Retaining
REV.Revision
RM.Room
RWD. Redwood
RWL. Rain Water Leader
S.South
S.C.Solid Core
S.C.D. See Civil Drawings
S.D.Storm Drain
S.E.D. See Electrical Drawings
S.H.Sprinkler Head
S.K.D. See Kitchen Drawings
S.L.D. See Landscape Drawings
S.M.D. See Mechanical Drawings
S.P.D. See Plumbing Drawings
S.S.Stainless Steel
S.S.D. See Structural Drawings
S.S.K. Service Sink
S.V.Sheet Vinyl
S.W.Shear Wall
SCHED. Schedule
SECT. Section
SEP.Separation
SHR. Shower
SHT.Sheet
SHTG. Sheathing
SIM.Similar
SL.Sliding
SPEC. Specifications or Special
SQ.Square
STD.Standard
STL.Steel
STOR. Storage
STRL. Structural
SYM. Symmetrical
SYS.System
T.Tread
T.&G. Tongue & Groove
T.B.Towel Bar
T.B.D. To Be Determined
T.C.Top of Curb
T.M.E. To Match Existing
T.O.Top of
T.O.C. Top of Concrete
T.O.P. Top of Plate
T.O.PLY Top of Plywood
T.O.W. Top of Wall
TEL.Telephone
TEMP. Tempered
TER.Terrazzo
THK.Thick
TYP.Typical
U.B.C. Uniform Building Code
U.O.N. Unless Otherwise Noted
UNEXC. Unexcavated
UNF.Unfinished
V.C.T. Vinyl Compostition Tile
V.G.D.F. Vertical Grain Douglas Fir
V.I.F. Verify in Field
VAR.Varies
VEN.Veneer
VERT. Vertical
VEST. Vestibule
VOL.Volume
W.West
W.C.Wall Covering
W.H.Water Heater
W.P.Work Point or Waterproofing
W.P.M. Waterproof Membrane
W.R.B. Weather/Water Resistive Barrier
W.S.P. Wet Standpipe
W.W. Welded Wire
w/with
WD.Wood
WR.Water Resistant
WSCT. Wainscot
WT.Weight
A.1.000 COVER SHEET
G.1.000 FLOOR AREA PLAN
G.1.001 FLOOR AREA PLAN
G.1.002 FLOOR AREA PLAN
G.1.003 SUBGRADE WALL EXPOSED AREAS
G.1.004 MAIN LEVEL EXPOSED AREA
G.1.005 RDS COMPLIANCE DIAGRAMS
G.1.006 TOP OF BLUFF REVIEW DIAGRAMS
G.1.007 ACES PROPOSED VIEWLINE
G.1.008 RENDERINGS
G.1.008A RENDERINGS
G.1.009 LOT COVERAGE
A.1.101 OVERALL SITE PLAN
A.1.201 OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LOWER LEVEL 1
A.1.202 OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LOWER LEVEL 2
A.1.203 OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - MAIN LEVEL
A.1.204 OVERALL ROOF PLAN
A.1.208 EXISTING LL1 PLAN
A.1.209 EXISTING LL2 PLAN
A.1.300 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - REFERENCE
A.1.301 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - ENLARGED
A.1.302 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - ENLARGED
A.1.303 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - ENLARGED
A.1.304 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - ENLARGED
A.1.400 BUILDING SECTIONS
A.1.401 BUILDING SECTIONS
A.1.402 BUILDING SECTIONS
A.1.405 BUILDING SECTIONS
A.1.409 EXISTING BUILDING SECTIONS
OWNER:
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
ARCHITECT:
EIGELBERGER ARCHITECTURE & DESIGN
350 MARKET STREET, SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
CONTACT: CRISTOF EIGELBERGER, AIA
(415) 819-6284
info@eigelberger.com
CONTRACTOR:
TBD
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER:
ALBRIGHT & ASSOCIATES
17352 A Hwy 82
Carbondale, CO 81623
CONTACT: JACK ALBRIGHT
(970) 927-4363
jack@albright-associates.com
CIVIL ENGINEER:
ROARING FORK ENGINEERING
592 CO-133
Carbondale, CO 81623
CONTACT: TYLER STEVENS
(970) 340-4130 ext. 706
MECHANICAL ENGINEER:
TBD
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:
DESIGN WORKSHOP
1390 Lawrence Street, Suite 100
Denver, Colorado 80204
303-623-5186
CONTACT: BRITTANY BLICHARZ
(720) 907-9338
bblicharz@designworkshop.com
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
PLANS ARE INDICATIVE OF DESIGN INTENT, MAY CHANGE PRIOR TO
BUILDING PERMIT SUBMISSION, AND ARE NOT INTENDED TO ESTABLISH
LIMITATION
Exhibit A8
75
8' HT.EVGN
RENAME-T-EVGN8'
A.1.300
1
A.1.300
41 5432
A
C
E
D
8'
F'
7'
A.1.300
2A.1.301
1
A.1.300
3
A.1.304
2
A.1.304
1
A.1.302
2
A.1.302
1
A.1.303
1
9'
I'
G'
H'
10'
B
J''
64.1
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
20
'
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
10' FRONT YARD SETBACK
20' REAR YARD SETBACK
20' - 0"
10
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
0
"
30'
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30'
-
0
"2015 COA APPROVED TOP OF BLUFF15'-0" SETBACK 30'-0" SETBACK15' - 0"
30' - 0"
SPA
POOL
2.6
F
7869' - 6"
7868' - 6"
7868' - 6"
PROJECT 100'-0" = SURVEY (USGS) 7868' 6"
T.O.F.F. @ MAIN LEVEL = 100'-0"
1
A.1.402
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:45 AM
A.1.101
OVERALL SITE PLAN
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"A.1.101
1 PROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
NOTES:
1. SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR FULL EXTERIOR SITE PLAN
76
59
'
-
3
3
/
4
"
16
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
1' - 11"TYP, VIF
1 5432
A
C
E
D
8'
F'
7'
9'
I'
G'
H'
10'
1
A.1.400
B
J''
2525 SF
MECHANICAL/UTILITY
B-001
1
A.1.401
6
1
A.1.406
4.1
ELEVATOR PIT ABOVE
22' - 6"36' - 1 3/4"
6' - 7"33' - 4 3/4"13' - 10"4' - 10"4' - 8 3/4"3' - 10 3/4"
3' - 0"2' - 3"
10
'
-
1
0
"
3'
-
0
"
ACCESS HATCH
7843' - 8"
7843' - 8"
20' - 7"12' - 5 7/8"10' - 0 1/8"16' - 5 1/4"0' - 8"17' - 3 3/4"7' - 7 5/8"
85' - 1 5/8"
0'
-
6
1
/
4
"
16
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
3'
-
1
0
7
/
8
"
5'
-
5
3
/
8
"
3'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
21
'
-
1
0
1
/
4
"
2'
-
8
"
21
'
-
3
"
2'
-
8
3
/
4
"
0'
-
7
1
/
4
"
5'
-
0
"
84
'
-
7
"
41
'
-
3
"
8'
-
5
"
8'
-
1
0
"
58
'
-
6
"
13' - 6"
32' - 6"
15' - 0"
61' - 0"
14
'
-
6
3
/
4
"
0' - 10 1/2"
52
'
-
4
"
2'
-
8
"
21
'
-
3
"
3'
-
4
"
5'
-
0
"
84
'
-
7
"
_______
A.1.633
2
UP
1110 SF
LL1
STORAGE
B-002
D027
2.6
CRAWLSPACE ABOVE - LESS
THAN 5'-6" CLEAR HEIGHT
EGRESS WELL
CONTINUES TO
CRAWLSPACE
ACCESS TO CRAWLSPACE ABOVE
F
PERMITTED TO REMAIN
PERMITTED TO REMAIN
1
A.1.402
T.O.SLAB
7847'-6 1/2"
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:45 AM
A.1.201
OVERALL FLOOR PLAN -
LOWER LEVEL 1
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"A.1.201
1 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL 1 REFERENCE PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
77
A.1.300
41 5432
A
C
E
D
8'
F'
7'
9'
I'
G'
H'
10'
W/DW/D
1
A.1.400
B
J''
1
A.1.401
1
A.1.403
3' - 8"
3'
-
0
"
FREE MOTIONMAX ARM EXTENTION122IN DIAMETER
1
A.1.405
6
1
A.1.406
4.1
7861' - 9"
7852' - 11"
7861' - 9"CRAWLSPACE 5' - 6" CLEAR OR LESS
CRAWLSPACE 5' - 6" CLEAR OR LESS
7852' - 11"
7851' - 11"7851' - 11"
7853' - 5"
AV/MECH
ELEV
CL
E
A
R
L
I
G
H
T
SA
N
C
T
U
A
R
Y
FU
L
L
S
P
E
C
T
R
U
M
3
367 SF
BED 3
B-023
337 SF
BED 2
B-027
254 SF
BED 1
B-015
531 SF
MEDIA
B-014
570 SF
SITTING
ROOM
B-013
517 SF
GYM
B-021
533 SF
BUNK
B-004 640 SF
GAME
B-008
193 SF
OFFICE
B-011
165 SF
MASSAGE
B-012
162 SF
BAR
B-018
_______
A.1.630
2
_______
A.1.633
1
DN
UP
41
'
-
3
"
8'
-
5
"
8'
-
1
0
"
58
'
-
6
"
13' - 6"
32' - 6"
15' - 0"
61' - 0"
52
'
-
4
"
2'
-
8
"
21
'
-
3
"
3'
-
4
"
5'
-
0
"
84
'
-
7
"
20' - 7"12' - 5 7/8"10' - 0 1/8"16' - 5 1/4"0' - 8"17' - 3 3/4"7' - 7 5/8"
85' - 1 5/8"
3' - 0"2' - 3 1/2"
3'
-
0
"
7'
-
5
"
ACCESS
HATCH
181 SF
BATH 2
B-029
137 SF
LAUNDRY
B-022
264 SF
STAIR/ELEV
B-003
D015
D0
1
2
D0
1
7
D0
1
8
D0
1
6
D0
0
2
D0
1
1
D0
1
4
D013
D0
2
1
D0
1
0
D0
0
7
D006
D0
0
8
D003
D0
0
5
D0
0
4
D009
D0
2
0
D023
D0
2
2
D025
D024
D026
D0
1
9
D001
W0
0
3
W004
W0
0
1
W0
0
2
12 SF
CLST 3
B-025
27 SF
SAUNA
B-026
POWDER 2
B-010
BUNK BATH
2
B-007
BUNK BATH
1
B-006 BUNK
CLOSET
B-005
POWDER 3
B-030
BATH 1
B-016
10
'
-
4
3
/
4
"
3' - 0"3' - 7 3/4"
5' - 10 3/4"
EQ EQ
2.6
UP
UP
REMOVABLE GRATE TO
BE PROVIDED FOR
ACCESS TO
CRAWLSPACE BELOW 7854' - 6 1/4"
7854' - 6 1/4"
F
1
A.1.402
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:51 AM
A.1.202
OVERALL FLOOR PLAN -
LOWER LEVEL 2
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"A.1.202
1 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL 2 REFERENCE PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
78
8' HT.EVGN
RENAME-T-EVGN8'
A.1.300
1
A.1.300
41 5432
A
C
E
D
8'
F'
7'
A.1.300
2A.1.301
1
A.1.300
3
A.1.304
2
A.1.304
1
A.1.302
2
A.1.302
1
A.1.303
1
20' - 7"12' - 5 7/8"10' - 0 1/8"16' - 5 1/4"17' - 11 3/4"7' - 7 5/8"
85' - 1 5/8"
9'
I'
G'
H'
10'
41
'
-
3
"
8'
-
5
"
8'
-
1
0
"
58
'
-
6
"
13' - 6"
32' - 6"
15' - 0"
61' - 0"
1
A.1.400
B
52
'
-
4
"
2'
-
8
"
21
'
-
3
"
3'
-
4
"
5'
-
0
"
J''
16' - 5 5/8"
12' - 2"
GREAT
ROOM
B-112
SUN ROOM
B-114
PANTRY
B-113
ENTRY
B-101
STAIR/ELEV
B-102
STUDY
B-105
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
B-106PRIMARY
BATH
B-107
PRIMARY
CLOSET
B-110
GARAGE
B-104
MUDROOM
B-103
ENTRY
POWDER
B-111
MAIN OFFICE
B-115
84
'
-
7
"
7868' - 6"
7869' - 6"
7868' - 6"
EQ
EQWD
1
A.1.401
1
A.1.403
11
'
-
0
"
1
A.1.405
6
1
A.1.406
4.1
7869' - 6"
DOG
DOOR
FORNI FOSSIPIZZA OVEN F90
_______A.1.630
1
6' - 0"
8'
-
0
"
28
'
-
0
"
14' - 0"
DN
A.1.211
A.1.210
E1
0
9
E1
0
7
W106
W109
W108
W104
E105
W1
0
3
W1
0
2
E104
E103
W1
0
0
W1
0
1
E102
D101
D1
0
4
D1
0
3
D105
D1
0
6
D107
E1
8
2
W1
0
5
E108
E1
0
1
W107
E1
0
6
E1
1
0
7868' - 6"
2 RISER @ 6"
2.6
F
1
A.1.402
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:53 AM
A.1.203
OVERALL FLOOR PLAN -
MAIN LEVEL
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"A.1.203
1 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL REFERENCE PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
79
1 5432
A
C
E
D
8'
F'
7'
A.1.301
1
A.1.304
1
A.1.302
1
A.1.303
1
9'
I'
G'
H'
10'
B
J''
7.1:12
7.1:12
7.
1
:
1
2
7.
1
:
1
2
7.
1
:
1
2
7.
1
:
1
2
7.
1
:
1
2
6
7891' - 2 3/8"
7887' - 8 3/4"
0.25:12
7881' - 2 1/4"7883' - 4"
15' - 3"
2'
-
4
1
/
8
"
2' - 0"
SOLAR-READY ZONE
(PER R404.5.1.1)
276 SF
SKYLIGHT
CHIMNEY CAP
CHIMNEY CAP
CHIMNEY CAP
13' - 6"
32' - 6"
15' - 0"
61' - 0"
41
'
-
3
"
8'
-
5
"
8'
-
1
0
"
58
'
-
6
"
52
'
-
4
"
2'
-
8
"
21
'
-
3
"
3'
-
4
"
5'
-
0
"
84
'
-
7
"
1'
-
8
"
2'
-
2
1
/
8
"
3:12 3:12
7.
1
:
1
2
7886' - 4 1/4"
7896' - 9"
2.6
3'
-
0
1
/
2
"
F
85' - 1 5/8"
20' - 7"12' - 5 7/8"10' - 0 1/8"16' - 5 1/4"17' - 11 3/4"7' - 7 5/8"
4'
-
8
"
7903' - 1 1/2"
7891' - 7 1/2"
7896' - 1 1/2"
CHIMNEY CAP
7891' - 7 1/2"
7888' - 10 1/4"
CRICKET
7.
1
:
1
2
7
.
2
:
1
2
5.
7
1
:
1
2
7861' - 1 1/2"
7890' - 5"
1'
-
8
"
3' - 8"
2'
-
6
"
3'
-
1
1
"
1' - 8"
1'
-
8
"
3' - 8"
3' - 8"
2' - 4"
15' - 4"
1'
-
8
"
9'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
1'
-
8
"
1' - 8"
2' - 8"
1'
-
8
"
1' - 8"
1'
-
8
"
1'
-
8
"
2' - 4"
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:57 AM
A.1.204
OVERALL ROOF PLAN
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"A.1.204
1 PROPOSED ROOF REFERENCE PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
80
1 5432
A
C
E
D
B
6
58' - 7 3/4"
16
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
3'
-
1
0
7
/
8
"
5'
-
5
3
/
8
"
3'
-
1
0
7
/
8
"
45
'
-
9
3
/
8
"
2'
-
8
1
/
2
"
33' - 4 3/4"13' - 10"4' - 10" 4' - 8 3/4" 3' - 10 3/4"
59
'
-
3
3
/
4
"
16
'
-
5
1
/
2
"
0'
-
6
1
/
4
"
7843' - 8"
MAT SLAB PERMITTED TO REMAIN PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS,
AS APPROVED BY PERMIT No. 0023.2016.ARBK
1' - 11"TYP, VIF
3663 SF; 4,201 SF TO EXTERIOR
LL1 FLOOR INTERIOR AREA
2.6
F
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:57 AM
A.1.208
EXISTING LL1 PLAN
22011
Author
Checker
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"A.1.208
1 EXISTING LL1 PLAN
81
1 5432
A
C
E
D
B
6
22' - 6"36' - 1 3/4"
16
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
3'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
5'
-
5
1
/
2
"
3'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
45
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
2'
-
8
1
/
2
"
6' - 7"33' - 4 3/4"13' - 10"4' - 10" 4' - 8 3/4" 3' - 10 3/4"
59
'
-
3
3
/
4
"
17
'
-
0
1
/
2
"
TEMPORARY STUD WALL
8 1/2" VIF, S.S.D. PER PERMIT No. 0023.2016.ARBK
1' - 0" VIF
3974 SF
LL2 FLOOR INTERIOR AREA
2.6
7852' 11"
PERMITTED TO REMAIN T.O.F.F.
F
11" LEDGE, VIF
1' - 2 1/2" LEDGE, VIF
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:35:57 AM
A.1.209
EXISTING LL2 PLAN
22011
Author
Checker
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"A.1.209
1 EXISTING LL2 PLAN
82
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
A C ED
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
B _______A.1.302
2 Sim_______A.1.302
1 Sim
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
F
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
8'7'
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
9'10'
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
ACED
360 ROOF HEIGHT
7896' - 9"
360 GARAGE7869' - 6"
B _______A.1.304
2 Sim_______
A.1.304
1 Sim
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
F
5'
-
5
1
9
7
/
2
5
6
"
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
1 5432
360 ROOF HEIGHT
7896' - 9"
360 GARAGE7869' - 6"
6
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
2.6
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
3/32" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:05 AM
A.1.300
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
REFERENCE
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 3/32" = 1'-0"A.1.300
1 EAST ELEVATION
SCALE : 3/32" = 1'-0"A.1.300
2 360 NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE : 3/32" = 1'-0"A.1.300
3 WEST ELEVATION
SCALE : 3/32" = 1'-0"A.1.300
4 SOUTH ELEVATION
NOTE:
1 - FINAL EXTERIOR MATERAL SPECIFICATIONS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH BUILDING PERMIT.
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
83
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR
7843' - 8"
8'7'
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
21
'
-
6
7
/
8
"
28
'
-
3
"
9'10'
NATURAL SLATE ROOF
STONE VENEER
HISTORIC GRADE (25' OFFSET)
HISTORIC GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE (25' OFFSET)
DOG ACCESS DOOR
13' - 6"32' - 6"15' - 0"
61' - 0"
E105
W108 W109
E108
W107 TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
'
-
7
7
/
8
"
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
'
-
1
1
1
/
4
"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:09 AM
A.1.301
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
ENLARGED
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.301
1 NORTH ELEVATION - ENLARGED
NOTE:
1 - FINAL EXTERIOR MATERAL SPECIFICATIONS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH BUILDING PERMIT.
STONE WOOD NON-REFLECTIVE METALS
EXTERIOR MATERIAL PALETTE
SLATE ROOF
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
84
A C EDB
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
'
-
4
1
/
4
"
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
14
'
-
9
3
/
8
"
24
'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
NON-REFLECTIVE METAL
STONE
WOOD
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
10
'
-
6
"
5' - 0"3' - 4"21' - 3"2' - 8"
32' - 3"
W102 W103
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR
7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL
7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
F'
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
'
-
1
1
1
/
4
"
21
'
-
6
7
/
8
"
I'G'H'
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
EAVE LINE ONE-THIRD OF
HEIGHT BETWEEN RIDGE AND
EAVE POINT PER CITY OF ASPEN
LUC 26.575.020 (f)(2)c. (TYP)
NON-REFLECTIVE METAL
STONE
28
'
-
3
"
13
'
-
6
"
HISTORIC GRADE: 25' OFFSET
HISTORIC GRADE
BLACKENED STEEL TRELLIS
NATURAL SLATE ROOF
41' - 3"8' - 5"8' - 10"
58' - 6"
W105
E107
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
E106
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:13 AM
A.1.302
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
ENLARGED
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.302
1 EAST ELEVATION (SOUTH WING)
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.302
2 EAST ELEVATION (NORTH WING)
NOTE:
1 - FINAL EXTERIOR MATERAL SPECIFICATIONS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH BUILDING PERMIT.
STONE WOOD NON-REFLECTIVE METALS
EXTERIOR MATERIAL PALETTE
SLATE ROOF
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
85
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR
7843' - 8"
1 5432
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
360 GARAGE
7869' - 6"
64.1
14
'
-
9
3
/
8
"
EAVE LINE ONE-THIRD OF HEIGHT BETWEEN
RIDGE AND EAVE POINT PER CITY OF ASPEN
LUC 26.575.020 (f)(2)c. (TYP)
EAVE LINE ONE-THIRD OF HEIGHT BETWEEN
RIDGE AND EAVE POINT PER CITY OF ASPEN
LUC 26.575.020 (f)(2)c. (TYP)
NATURAL SLATE ROOF
NON-REFLECTIVE METAL
STONE
DOUBLE GARAGE DOOR W/
VISUAL SEPERATION
PER CITY OF ASPEN LUC
26.410.030 (c)(4) d. 2.
HISTORIC GRADE (25' OFFSET)
HISTORIC GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE (25' OFFSET)
7' - 7 5/8"17' - 3 3/4"0' - 8"16' - 5 1/4"22' - 6"20' - 7"
85' - 1 5/8"
E103
E104E102
W201
18
'
-
4
1
/
4
"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
2.6
17
'
-
0
3
/
8
"
17
'
-
4
1
/
4
"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:16 AM
A.1.303
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
ENLARGED
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.303
1 SOUTH ELEVATION - ENLARGED
NOTE:
1 - FINAL EXTERIOR MATERAL SPECIFICATIONS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH BUILDING PERMIT.
STONE WOOD NON-REFLECTIVE METALS
EXTERIOR MATERIAL PALETTE
SLATE ROOF
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
86
F'I'G'H'
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
21
'
-
6
7
/
8
"
NON-REFLECTIVE METAL
STONE
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
'
-
7
7
/
8
"
NATURAL SLATE ROOF
58' - 6"
41' - 3"8' - 5"8' - 10"
E109
E110 13
'
-
6
"
11
'
-
0
"
T.O.S. 360 LL2 CRAWLSPACE7847' - 6 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE
7865' - 1 1/2"
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
ACED
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
TH
I
R
D
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
'
-
4
1
/
4
"
24
'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
360 GARAGE
7869' - 6"
B
360 MAIN CRAWLSPACE7861' - 9"
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
WOOD
NON-REFLECTIVE METAL
STONE
4'
-
6
"
4' - 6"
4'
-
6
"
4' - 6"
12
'
-
0
"
HISTORIC GRADE (25' OFFSET)
HISTORIC GRADE
HA
L
F
H
E
I
G
H
T
16
'
-
2
3
/
4
"
2' - 8"21' - 3"3' - 4"5' - 0"
32' - 3"
E101
W100 W101
3'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:19 AM
A.1.304
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
ENLARGED
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.304
1 WEST ELEVATION (NORTH WING)
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.304
2 WEST ELEVATION (SOUTH WING)
NOTE:
1 - FINAL EXTERIOR MATERAL SPECIFICATIONS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH BUILDING PERMIT.
STONE WOOD NON-REFLECTIVE METALS
EXTERIOR MATERIAL PALETTE
SLATE ROOF
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
87
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR
7843' - 8"
8'7'
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
9'10'
S
IH
T
2023-01 SURVEY T.O. LEDGE7851' - 3 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - UPPER7867' - 0 1/4"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
F
I
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
P
E
R
2
6
.
5
7
5
.
0
2
0
(
d
)
(
9
)
13
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
B
.
O
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
F
L
O
O
R
9'
-
3
"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - LOWER7863' - 4 1/4"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
B
.
O
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
7'
-
9
1
/
4
"
14
'
-
1
1
"
GYM
B-021
LAUNDRY
B-022
CLST 2
B-028
BED 2
B-027
SITTING
ROOM
B-013
BED 1
B-015
MECHANICAL/UTILITY
B-001
BATH 1
B-016
PLENUM
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
9'
-
0
"
7847' - 6 1/2"
7843' - 8"
T.O.S. 360 LL2 CRAWLSPACE7847' - 6 1/2"
13
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
1'
-
7
1
/
4
"
1'
-
7
1
/
2
"
3'
-
9
"
3'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
F
I
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
13
'
-
1
"
1'
-
4
1
/
2
"
10
'
-
2
"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
B
.
O
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
10
'
-
7
1
/
4
"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:20 AM
A.1.400
BUILDING SECTIONS
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.400
1 LIVING TRANSVERSE SECTION
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
88
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR
7843' - 8"
1 5432
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
360 GARAGE7869' - 6"
S
IH
T
2023-01 SURVEY T.O. LEDGE7851' - 3 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - UPPER7867' - 0 1/4"
64.1
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - LOWER7863' - 4 1/4"
ELEVATOR SHAFT
ELEVATOR PIT
POOL
BUNK
B-004
GARAGE
B-104 STAIR/ELEV
B-102
GAME
B-008
LL1
STORAGE
B-002
MASSAGE
B-012
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
B-106
PRIMARY
W.C.
B-108
PRIMARY
SHOWER
B-109
ENTRY
POWDER
B-111
15
'
-
7
"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
2.6
7866' - 0"
7847' - 6 1/2"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
F
I
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
P
E
R
2
6
.
5
7
5
.
0
2
0
(
d
)
(
9
)
14
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
T.O.S. 360 LL2 CRAWLSPACE7847' - 6 1/2"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
B
.
O
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
13
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
7843' - 8"
28
'
-
3
"
13
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
1'
-
7
1
/
4
"
5'
-
4
1
/
2
"
3'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
1'
-
0
"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
F
I
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
13
'
-
1
"
FL
O
O
R
T
O
B
.
O
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:20 AM
A.1.401
BUILDING SECTIONS
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.401
1 MASTER WING SECTION
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
89
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR
7843' - 8"
1 5432
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
360 GARAGE7869' - 6"
S
IH
T
2023-01 SURVEY T.O. LEDGE7851' - 3 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - UPPER7867' - 0 1/4"
64.1
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - LOWER7863' - 4 1/4"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
2.6
GARAGE
B-104
PRIMARY
CLOSET
B-110
PRIMARY
BATH
B-107
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
B-106
BUNK
B-004
STAIR/ELEV
B-003
GAME
B-008
POWDER 2
B-010
OFFICE
B-011
LL1
STORAGE
B-002
REMOVABLE GRATE TO
ACCESS CRAWLSPACE
MECHANICAL ACCESS
HATCH
MECHANICAL ACCESS
HATCH
FI
N
I
S
H
F
L
O
O
R
B
E
L
O
W
G
R
A
D
E
14
'
-
3
3
/
4
"
CR
A
W
L
S
P
A
C
E
5'
-
6
"
3'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
T.O.S. 360 LL2 CRAWLSPACE7847' - 6 1/2"
28
'
-
3
"
15
'
-
7
"
9'
-
3
"
7843' - 8"
7847' - 6 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:20 AM
A.1.402
BUILDING SECTIONS
22011
Author
Checker
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.402
1 BUILDING SECTION @ FULL HEIGHT EGRESS WELL
90
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
ACED
360 ROOF HEIGHT7896' - 9"
360 GARAGE7869' - 6"
B
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - UPPER
7867' - 0 1/4"
360 MAIN CRAWLSPACE7861' - 9"
5'
-
3
1
/
4
"
CRAWLSPACE
BED 3
B-023
GYM
B-021
PANTRY
B-113 MUDROOM
B-103 GARAGE
B-104
BUNK
B-004
BUNK
CLOSET
B-005
14
'
-
9
"
12
'
-
6
"
1'
-
0
"
1'
-
5
3
/
4
"
5'
-
3
1
/
4
"
FLAT BOTTOM TRUSS FLAT BOTTOM TRUSS
E102
PLENUM
SAUNA
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
F
FI
N
I
S
H
F
L
O
O
R
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
14
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
FI
N
I
S
H
F
L
O
O
R
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
14
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
T.O.S. 360 LL2 CRAWLSPACE7847' - 6 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
7'
-
2
3
/
4
"
6'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:21 AM
A.1.405
BUILDING SECTIONS
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.405
1 PANTRY AND GARAGE SECTION
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
91
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR
7843' - 8"
S
IH
T
T.O. FDN7864' - 0 1/2"
5432
S
IH
T
2023-01 SURVEY T.O. LEDGE7851' - 3 1/2"
6
LL2 T.O.F.F. PERMITTED TO REMAIN
T.O. CONC VARIES, SEE SURVEY
TY
P
.
L
E
D
G
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
7'
-
7
1
/
2
"
TEMPORARY GRADE/SHORING FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES,
NOT FULLY BACKFILLED
HISTORIC GRADE
20
'
-
4
1
/
2
"
2'
-
8
"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED
7854' - 6 1/4"
2.6
11
'
-
1
1
/
2
"
3"
1'
-
2
"
7'
-
1
0
"
T.O.S. 360 LL2 CRAWLSPACE
7847' - 6 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:22 AM
A.1.409
EXISTING BUILDING
SECTIONS
22011
Author
Checker
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0"A.1.409
1 EXISTING BUILDING SECTION
92
4201 SF
LL1 SUBGRADE AREA
SUBGRADE AREA
COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA
DECK AREA
GARAGE
EXEMPT AREA
ELEVATOR PIT ABOVE
CRAWLSPACE ABOVE - LESS
THAN 5'-6" CLEAR HEIGHT
EGRESS WELL
CONTINUES TO
CRAWLSPACE
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:22 AM
G.1.000
FLOOR AREA PLAN
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"G.1.000
1 LOWER LEVEL 1 FLOOR AREA PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
93
6997 SF
LL2 SUBGRADE AREA
EXEMPT CRAWLSPACE:
LESS THAN 5'-6" CLEAR
EXEMPT CRAWLSPACE:
LESS THAN 5'-6" CLEAR
SUBGRADE AREA
COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA
DECK AREA
GARAGE
EXEMPT AREA
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:25 AM
G.1.001
FLOOR AREA PLAN
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"G.1.001
1 LOWER LEVEL 2 FLOOR AREA PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
94
GARAGE
(500 - 375 EXEMPT)
125 SF
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
(EXEMPT PER 26.575.020(d)(6)
378 SF
PATIO AREA (LESS T
H
A
N
6
"
F
R
O
M
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
D
G
R
A
D
E
)
78' - 3"
4094 SF
MAIN LEVEL
STAIR EXEMPT ON TOP LEVEL
SUBGRADE AREA
COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA
DECK AREA
GARAGE
EXEMPT AREA
ELEV
LINE OF TRELLIS ABOVE
PORCH TO COUNT AS DECK PER 26.575.020 (d)(6)
463 SF
DECK AREA UNDER
R
O
O
F
52 SF
DECK: FIXED GRILL
340 SF
FRONT PORCH
20 SF
DECK: FIRE TABLE 1
54 SF
DECK: BUILT IN BEN
C
H
24 SF
DECK: FIRE TABLE 2
36 SF
DECK: SITE WALL 2
16 SF
DECK: SITE WALL 1
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:27 AM
G.1.002
FLOOR AREA PLAN
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"G.1.002
1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA PLAN
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
95
26
20
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
16
'
-
8
1
/
2
"5' - 6 1/8"5'
-
5
1
/
2
"
4' - 8 3/4"
45
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
13' - 10"4' - 10"
2'
-
8
1
/
4
"5' - 6 1/8"4' - 8 3/4"
19
25
2'
-
8
1
/
2
"
18' - 8"
16/17
/18 7'
-
5
7
/
8
"
7'
-
0
5
/
8
"
4' - 2"7'
-
9
3
/
4
"
3' - 8"
7"
4'
-
4
"
3'
-
4
3
/
4
"
21/22
23/24
7'
-
7
3
/
8
"
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
334 SF
BURIED
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - UPPER7867' - 0 1/4"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - LOWER
7863' - 4 1/4"
22' - 10 5/8"T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
13
'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
22 SF
BURIED
1' - 9 1/2"
12
'
-
6
"
42' - 6 5/8"
12
'
-
6
"
1'
-
7
1
/
4
"
586 SF
BURIED
6' - 10 7/8"3' - 4 1/2"32' - 3 1/4"
2' - 8 1/4"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
28 SF
BURIED
13' - 10"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
144 SF
BURIED
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
2' - 8 1/8"
28 SF
BURIED
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - UPPER
7867' - 0 1/4"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - LOWER7863' - 4 1/4"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
4' - 10"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
50 SF
BURIED
45' - 9 1/2"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
478 SF
BURIED
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
4' - 8 3/4"
49 SF
BURIED
5' - 6 1/8"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
58 SF
BURIED
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
5' - 5 1/2"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
57 SF
BURIED
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - LOWER7863' - 4 1/4"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
5' - 6 1/8"
58 SF
BURIED
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
4' - 8 3/4"
49 SF
BURIED
16' - 8 1/2"
174 SF
BURIED
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
18' - 8"
195 SF
BURIED
14
'
-
1
1
/
4
"
0' - 6 1/4"
7 SF
BURIED
22' - 6"
317 SF
BURIED
14
'
-
1
1
/
4
"
92' - 1 7/8"
1026 SF
BURIED
40 SF
EXPOSED
9' - 3"57' - 1 7/8"8' - 8"9' - 10 1/4"3' - 0"4' - 2 3/4"
92' - 1 7/8"10
'
-
7
1
/
4
"
1'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
0'
-
8
1
/
2
"
0'
-
5
5
/
8
"
13
'
-
8
1
/
8
"
12
'
-
6
"
7' - 10 1/2"
98 SF
BURIED
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
13' - 3 1/4"139 SF
BURIED
12
'
-
6
"
23' - 1 5/8"
289 SF
BURIED
27 SF
EXPOSED
52 SF
BURIED3'
-
2
"
7'
-
3
1
/
4
"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
3' - 8"3' - 9 7/8"
7' - 5 7/8"
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
13 SF
BURIED
30 SF
EXPOSED
4' - 2"
3'
-
2
"
7'
-
3
1
/
4
"
10
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - LOWER7863' - 4 1/4"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
47 SF
BURIED
27 SF
EXPOSED
3'
-
2
"
7'
-
3
1
/
4
"
7' - 0 5/8"
46 SF
BURIED
12
'
-
6
"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - UPPER7867' - 0 1/4"
7' - 7 11/32"
67 SF
BURIED
3'
-
2
"
28 SF
EXPOSED
3' - 0"
9'
-
4
"
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
12
'
-
6
"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:40 AM
G.1.003
SUBGRADE WALL
EXPOSED AREAS
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"1 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"2 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"3 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"4 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"5
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"6 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"7 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"8 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"9 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"10
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"11 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"12 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"13 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"14 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"15
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"20 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"21
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"26
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"22SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"19
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"25
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"16
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"17 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"18 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"23
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"24
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
96
1
1.
2.3.
5.
4.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
SEE 14
SEE 4
2.6
F
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
360 GARAGE7869' - 6"
633 SF
EXPOSED
44' - 5"
85 SF
EXPOSED
13
'
-
6
"
4'
-
2
3
/
8
"
5' - 3 1/2"
291 SF
EXPOSED
16' - 5 1/4"
17
'
-
8
5
/
8
"
213 SF
EXPOSED
17' - 11 3/4"
12
'
-
1
1
/
8
"
215 SF
EXPOSED
24
'
-
6
"
17
'
-
8
5
/
8
"
14
'
-
8
1
/
4
"
28' - 7"
19
'
-
2
3
/
4
"
12
'
-
6
5
/
8
"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
115 SF
EXPOSED
69 SF
GLAZED
8' - 2 1/2"
2'
-
0
"
9'
-
0
"
1'
-
1
1
/
8
"
7' - 8 1/2"
16
'
-
1
1
3
/
8
"
12
'
-
1
1
/
8
"
40 SF
EXPOSED
2' - 4"
16
'
-
1
1
3
/
8
"
110 SF
EXPOSED
6' - 2"
16
'
-
1
1
3
/
8
"
1'
-
9
7
/
8
"
40 SF
EXPOSED
16
'
-
1
1
3
/
8
"
2' - 4"
115 SF
EXPOSED
8' - 2 1/2"
16
'
-
1
1
3
/
8
"
213 SF
EXPOSED
12
'
-
1
1
/
8
"
17' - 11 3/4"
232 SF
EXPOSED
15' - 9 1/4"
14
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
123 SF
EXPOSED
14
'
-
3
"
8' - 7 1/4"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
360 SF
EXPOSED
17
'
-
9
1
/
4
"
27
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
33' - 10"
5' - 8 1/2"25' - 3 1/4"2' - 10 1/4"
14
'
-
8
3
/
8
"
3'
-
1
1
/
2
"
653 SF
EXPOSED
17
'
-
9
1
/
4
"
36' - 9"
187 SF
EXPOSED
17
'
-
9
1
/
4
"
10' - 6"
66 SF
EXPOSED
4' - 0"
16
'
-
7
1
/
8
"
68 SF
EXPOSED
16
'
-
7
1
/
8
"
4' - 6"
364 SF
EXPOSED
16
'
-
7
1
/
8
"
5'
-
7
3
/
4
"
18' - 7"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
18 SF
BURIED
463 SF
EXPOSED
63 SF
GLAZED
16
'
-
7
"
7'
-
8
1
/
8
"
15
'
-
7
1
/
8
"
0'
-
1
1
7
/
8
"
25' - 11 5/8"
563 SF
EXPOSED
25 SF
BURIED
SEE 23
23
'
-
3
1
/
4
"
3'
-
7
"
6' - 11 1/2"
1'
-
0
"
14
'
-
6
"
1'
-
1
1
/
8
"
17' - 6 7/8"
111 SF
EXPOSED
8 SF
BURIED
1'
-
0
"
14
'
-
5
3
/
4
"
7' - 8 1/4"
179 SF
EXPOSED
9 SF
BURIED1'
-
0
"
14
'
-
6
"
14
'
-
6
"
85 SF
EXPOSED
3 SF
BURIED
1'
-
0
"
14
'
-
6
"
3' - 0"2' - 7 7/8"
328 SF
EXPOSED
17' - 3 1/8"
1 SF
BURIED
21
'
-
7
1
/
8
"
0' - 2 3/4"1' - 1 3/8"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
182 SF
EXPOSED
13
'
-
6
"
13' - 6"
713 SF
EXPOSED
17
'
-
9
1
/
4
"
41' - 2"
161 SF
EXPOSED14
'
-
3
"
11' - 3 1/2"
293 SF
EXPOSED
19' - 11"
14
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
655 SF
EXPOSED
14
'
-
9
1
/
8
"
33' - 7"
24
'
-
6
"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:36:53 AM
G.1.004
MAIN LEVEL EXPOSED
AREA
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"1.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"2.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"3.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"5.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"4.
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"6.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"7.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"8.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"9.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"10.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"11.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"12.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"13.
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"14.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"15.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"16.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"17.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"18.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"19.
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"20.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"21.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"22.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"23.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"24.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"25.
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"26.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"27.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"28.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"29.SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"30.
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
97
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
20
'
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
20' - 0"
10
'
-
0
"
10' FRONT YARD SETBACK
20' REAR YARD SETBACK
30'
S
I
D
E
Y
A
R
D
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30'
-
0
"
20
'
-
0
"
17' - 7"
5'
-
8
"
7'
-
8
"
6' - 11"
26' - 0"
44' - 5"
5'
-
0
"
16' - 5"
3'
-
4
"
18' - 1"
20' - 7"11
'
-
3
"
RDS B.1 - ARTICULATION OF BUILDING MASS
MAXIMUM SIDE WALL DEPTH IS NOT GREATER
THAN 50 FEET IN DEPTH
RDS B.1 - ARTICULATION OF BUILDING MASS
MAXIMUM SIDE WALL DEPTH IS NOT
GREATER THAN 50 FEET IN DEPTH
RDS B.3 - BUILD TO REQUIREMENT
FRONT FAçADE IS CONSIDERED WEST
FACADE ORIENTED TOWARD LAKE AVE.
CALCULATIONS AS FOLLOWS:
= (33'-7" + 17'-0" + 30'-0") / (33'-7" + 11'-3" +6'-9"
+ 30'-0" + 17'-0") = 80'-7" / 106'-1" = 75.96%
33
'
-
7
"
TO LAKE AVENUE
5' - 0"
29
'
-
6
"
17
'
-
3
"
FRONT PATIO
REAR PATIO
RDS B.2 - BUILDING ORIENTATION
BUILDING ORIENTATION TOWARD
LAKE AVE AND VISIBLE PORTION
OF BUILDING FROM LAKE AVE IS
RIGHT AT SETBACK, REFER TO
RENDERED VIEWS
LA
K
E
A
V
E
350 LAKE
RDS CONFORMANCE
SUBMITTED IN SEPARATE
DOCUMENT
360 LAKE
PRIMARY ENTRY
6'
-
9
"2015 COA APPROVED TOP OF BLUFF15'-0" SETBACK 30'-0" SETBACK15' - 0"
30' - 0"
13' - 6"
10
0
'
-
4
"
49
'
-
7
"
RDS C.1 - GARAGE ACCESS
GARAGE ACCESS OFF STREET FROM SHARED
DRIVEWAY
GARAGE
RDS C.2 - GARAGE PLACEMENT
GARAGE LOCATED IN LOCATION TO MINIMIZE VIEW
FROM LAKE AVE. THE GARAGE BUILDING MASS IS
DESIGNED WITH WINDOWS AND FENESTRATION TO
LOOK LIKE THE REST OF THE RESIDENCE.
REFERENCE RENDERED VIEWS
20' - 0"
RDS C.3 - GARAGE DIMENSIONS
THE GARAGE IS NOT STREET FACING AND
WIDTH OF ENTRANCE IS 20'
RDS D.1 - ENTRY CONNECTION
THE FRONT FAçADE HAS A COVERED
FRONT PORCH THAT IS OPEN ON (2) SIDES
AND SIZE OF 157 SF WITH DEMARCATED
PATHWAY FROM DRIVEWAY
14' - 0"
RDS E.4 - LIGHTWELL LOCATION
LIGHTWELL IS NOT VISIBLE FROM LAKE AVE
AND LOCATED IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK
ALONG THE SOUTH FACADE WOULD BE VISIBLE
FROM LAKE AVE; ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE TO
CONFORM WITH INTENT OF STANDARD:
LIGHTWELL IS LOCATED IN STREET-FACING
SETBACK, REFER TO RENDERED VIEWS
VIEW A
VIEW B
VIEW C
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
3/32" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:37:01 AM
G.1.005
RDS COMPLIANCE
DIAGRAMS
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 3/32" = 1'-0"G.1.005
1 360 LAKE RDS COMPLAINCE DIAGRAM
SCALE :G.1.005
2 B.4 ONE STORY ELEMENT DIAGRAM
RDS B.4 - ONE STOREY ELEMENT (FLEXIBLE)
ENTIRE BUILDING IS ONE-STORY AND LOGGIA ELEMENT IS OPEN ON
(2) SIDES AND EQUIVALENT TO 49.67% (49'-10"/100'-4"=49.67%)
OVERALL WIDTH.
ALTERNATE COMPLIANCE:
FRONT FACADE HAS OPEN LOGGIA IS RECESSED MORE THAN 10' IN
LOCATION NOT VISIBLE FROM LAKE AVE, REFER TO RENDERED
VIEWS.
100'-4"
49'-10"
20'-
7
"
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
98
TOP OF BLUFF LINE
15' SETBACK
30' SETBACK
TOP OF BLUFF LINE
15' SETBACK
30' SETBACK
S
IH
T
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 EXR7852' - 11"
360 MAIN LEVEL7868' - 6"
S
IH
T
T.O.S. 360 LL1 EXR7843' - 8"
15432
FRONT OF BLUFF LINE
15' - 0"
30' - 0"
T.O. BLUFF7865' - 0"
6
4
5
.
0
0
°
45° PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT
LIMIT SEC. 26.435.060
T.O.F.F. 360 LL2 RAISED7854' - 6 1/4"
2.6
T.O.S. 360 LL2 CRAWLSPACE7847' - 6 1/2"
B.O. MAIN LEVEL STRUCTURE - MIDDLE7865' - 1 1/2"
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/16" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:37:23 AM
G.1.006
TOP OF BLUFF REVIEW
DIAGRAMS
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE :G.1.006
1 BLUFF REVIEW AXO - SOUTHEAST
SCALE :G.1.006
2 BLUFF REVIEW AXO - NORTHEAST
SCALE : 1/16" = 1'-0"G.1.006
4 BLUFF REVIEW NORTH ELEVATION
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
99
VIE
W
L
I
N
E
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
As indicated
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:37:25 AM
G.1.007
ACES PROPOSED
VIEWLINE
22011
Author
Checker
G.1.007
1 REFERENCE PLAN
G.1.007
2 APPROXIMATE VIEW FROM ACES SHORELINE
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
100
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:37:29 AM
G.1.008
RENDERINGS
22011
Author
Checker
360 LAKE AT ENTRY
360 LAKE VIEWED FROM SOUTHEAST 360 LAKE AERIAL VIEW
360 LAKE VIEW OVER BLUFF
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
101
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:37:30 AM
G.1.008A
RENDERINGS
22011
Author
Checker
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
350-360 VIEWED FROM LAKE AVE - NORTHWEST 350-360 VIEWED FROM LAKE AVE AT DRIVEWAY
102
4751 SF
PROPOSED AREA OF BUILDING FOOTPRINT
4201 SF
EXISTING AREA OF BUILDING FOOTPRINT
COVERED AREA
N
350 MARKET STREET SUITE 309
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
PHONE: 970.300.3423 FAX: 415.358.5771
INFO@EIGELBERGER.COM
Th
e
s
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
EA
D
.
A
n
y
u
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
wr
i
t
t
e
n
c
o
n
s
e
n
t
o
f
E
A
D
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
la
w
.
E
A
D
d
i
s
c
l
a
i
m
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
f
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
i
n
pa
r
t
a
t
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
t
h
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
n
t
.
I
f
yo
u
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
he
r
e
b
y
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
r
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
s
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
Co
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
c
2
0
2
3
b
y
E
I
G
E
L
B
E
R
G
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
&
D
E
S
I
G
N
SCALE:
Plot Date
Drawn By
Checked By
Project No.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCLIENT REVIEW:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DESIGN INTENT:
CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN INTENT OF
THE DOCUMENT. CLIENT APPROVES DESIGN
INTENT. ARCHITECT WILL PROCEED WITH DETAILS
AND COORDINATION WITH CONTRACTOR PER SIGN
OFF ON DOCUMENT.
NOTE: ANY CHANGES TO THE APPROVED
DRAWINGS BY CLIENT ARE ADDITIONAL SERVICE
PER CONTRACT.
ARCHITECT TO PICKUP CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.
CLIENT SIGNATURE:
___________________________
DATE OF APPROVAL:
____________________________
Date Issue
36
0
L
A
K
E
A
V
E
(
L
O
T
1
)
AS
P
E
N
,
C
O
8
1
6
1
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Au
t
o
d
e
s
k
D
o
c
s
:
/
/
2
2
0
1
1
-
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
/
2
2
0
1
1
_
3
5
0
-
3
6
0
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
R
2
3
.
r
v
t
5/5/2023 11:37:32 AM
G.1.009
LOT COVERAGE
22011
Author
Checker
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"G.1.009
1 PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"G.1.009
2 EXISTING LOT COVERAGE
03-10-2023 SD PRICING
05-05-2023 360 P&Z
103
350/360 Lake Avenue
Aspen, CO
Tree Survey Report
Prepared By: Chris Forman
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist #RM-2352BM
February 17, 2023
15450 Hwy 82, Carbondale CO 81623 (970) 963-3070
Exhibit A9
104
1 | Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Purpose and Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2
Methodology………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2
Assignment………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..2
Limits of Assignment……………………………………………………………………………………………………………3
Purpose and Use of Report……………………………………………………………………………………………………3
Inventory…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3
Mitigation Calculation………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4
Observations and Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5
Site Description………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5
Tree Observations……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5
Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….7
Photos…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..9
Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………13
Recommendations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….13
Attachment A – Inventory Table………………………………………………………………………………………………………..14
Attachment B – Site Survey……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….15
105
2 | Page
PURPOSE & SUMMARY
The following report pertains to 350/360 Lake Avenue, within the city limits of Aspen, Colorado. Trees
in this report are large enough to be governed by the City of Aspen Municipal Code Language. Tree
species within the targeted landscaped areas consist of blue spruce (Picea pungens). Trees adjacent to
this property that may be impacted by construction efforts include narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus
angustifolia), aspen (Populus tremuloides), and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta). Aluminum numbered
tags were placed on the lower trunks of trees on the property in order to provide clarity to the inventory
findings (see the ‘Inventory’ section of this report for further explanation of tree tag placement). The
numbered tags correlate with the numbers assigned to the trees in the inventory spreadsheet attached
to this report. They are also identified in the attached tree survey completed by Design Workshop.
This report is designed to identify trees within the targeted landscaped area and surrounding properties
that may be impacted by construction efforts. Individual tree evaluations included species type, tree
diameter at breast height (DBH), overall condition, maximum value as assigned by the City of Aspen
Municipal Code, suggested reductions in mitigation value based upon condition, and trees that will be
likely candidates for preservation.
There are 20 spruce trees along the west and north property boundaries that are either in poor
condition or are too close to the proposed excavation limits to survive construction activities. There are
10 spruce that are candidates for preservation but air spading to explore their root systems will likely be
required by the City. Air spading along the proposed driveway will also likely be required due to the
close proximity of the trees in this area, and the fact that they are outside the property boundary. The
group of aspens on the northern property boundary are not candidates for air spading or preservation if
grade changes as proposed are 6 inches in depth or greater. These aspens will incur significant root loss
within their structural root zones. Grade changes within the limits of disturbance on the east portion of
the property will not impact the structural integrity of the mature cottonwoods along Hallam Bluff.
The mitigation value of the tagged trees assessed per City code valuation methodologies totals
$149,684.98. My suggested mitigation value based upon health condition ratings totals $92,130.15.
Final mitigation values are defined by the City Forester during the formal tree removal permit process
and may vary from the reduced mitigation values that I have assigned in this report.
METHODOLOGY
ASSIGNMENT
Aspen Tree Service has been asked by the property owner’s representative, Mike Albert with Design
Workshop, to inventory and assess the landscape trees and provide a report on their condition,
mitigation value, management recommendations, and potential impacts from the proposed
construction activities. The trees assessed included all code sized trees within the property boundaries
and those trees within the City right of way along Lake Avenue on the west side of the property. Trees
located outside the property boundaries to the north and south that may be impacted by proposed
construction activities were visually assessed but were not marked with aluminum tags, measured for
mitigation values, or captured in the tree inventory sheet.
106
3 | Page
LIMITS OF THE ASSIGNMENT
This inventory assessment is based solely upon the information noted from visits to the site in January
and February 2023. I have not performed any professional surveying, laboratory examinations, soil
composition/compaction studies, or any other diagnostic techniques beyond ground level visual
examination of the trees and the site. Trees located on the neighboring property were evaluated from
the 350/360 Lake Avenue property only. I did not access the neighbors’ properties when conducting my
evaluations. At the time of my visits to the property, snow depths varied across the landscape from
bare ground to 28 inches in depth. In addition, a tall construction fence with soundproofing material
surrounded the property, limiting the ability to see the lower 10-15 feet of the trees on the neighboring
property to the south.
PURPOSE & USE OF REPORT
The purpose of this report is to provide current information regarding the trees within the project
scope. It is intended to be used by the property owner and design team as an informative reference for
developing a management strategy for the tree resources on the property and to inform future
redevelopment planning efforts.
INVENTORY
Aspen Tree Service completed an inventory of targeted landscape trees within the defined project
scope in February of 2023. Numbered aluminum tags were placed on the stems of all code sized trees
within the property boundaries of 350/360 Lake Avenue. The numbers on the tags correspond to the
tree numbers assigned on the tree inventory table found as Attachment A of this report. Tags placed
on the trees on site correlate to the numbers assigned to the trees on the Design Workshop survey,
found as Attachment B to this document. Trees in the adjacent City right of way along Lake Avenue
received numbered tags, as approved by the City Forester during a conversation I had with him prior to
conducting my assessments. Trees on the neighboring properties to the north, east, and south did not
receive aluminum tags on their trunks.
For purposes of this report, a tree stem is defined as a stem originating at the ground or attached with
another stem within 4 ½ feet from the ground. During the inventory process, each tree stem within the
scope of this report was measured with a diameter tape and visually evaluated from the ground. Tree
data was collected for each stem including, tree #, the Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) measured to
the lower ½ inch at approximately 4.5 feet above ground level, tree species, and condition. Individual
trees were inspected from ground level only. No advanced assessment was done in tree canopies or
below existing soil levels.
107
4 | Page
Condition values were assigned as a result of visual indicators such as the presence of dead limbs, signs
or symptoms of disease/insects, or structural defects. Definitions of the condition scale are as follows:
Excellent - A healthy, vigorous tree, reasonably free of signs and symptoms of disease, with
good structure and form typical of the species.
Good - Tree with slight decline in vigor, small amount of twig dieback, minor structural defects
that could be corrected.
Fair - Tree with moderate vigor, moderate twig and small branch dieback, thinning of crown,
poor leaf color, moderate structural defects that might be mitigated by regular care.
Poor - Tree in decline, epicormic growth, extensive dieback of medium to large branches,
significant pathogen activity or structural defects that cannot be abated.
Very Poor/Dead - Tree is in severe decline, highly hazardous or is dead.
MITIGATION CALCULATION
Even though the purpose of this inventory report does not include applying for a tree removal permit
with the City of Aspen, a discussion regarding mitigation should be considered. We understand the
purpose and objectives of the City’s Tree Removal and mitigation requirements. Healthy trees are an
asset to the property owner and the community. However, trees that are in poor health or structurally
defected can present a safety and forest health liability for the property owner and the community.
Therefore, we believe it is reasonable and appropriate to account for this liability by adjusting/devaluing
the mitigation value of a specific tree based on the condition of the tree. This adjustment is made by
multiplying the tree’s value per the City of Aspen Municipal Code Valuation Formula by a percentage
based on the tree condition. The result is an adjusted mitigation value. The following narrative details
our mitigation adjustment procedure. Final tree approvals and mitigation values are ultimately made
by the City Forester or his designee.
Each tree stem evaluated was entered into a tree inventory worksheet noting the tree number, DBH,
condition rating, comments, and the adjusted mitigation DBH. The table showing these figures can be
found as Attachment A. The adjusted mitigation DBH was calculated by multiplying the actual
mitigation value by the assigned mitigation percentage.
The mitigation adjustment percentage ranges from 0 to 100%. This percentage was assigned based on
the condition of the tree, forest health and/or the wildfire risk the tree poses to the site and area.
Structurally defective trees can present a safety risk to people and/or property. Dead or declining trees
pose a threat to forest health, hosting and attracting insect pests and disease becoming a point source
for the spread of these pest and disease problems. Dead and declining trees as well as conifers growing
against the home can provide a fuel source for wildfire and provide a mechanism for the spread of
wildfire into adjacent structures. The following are the mitigation adjustment percentages used to
quantify all of these risks. We believe this is a reasonable method to maintain the City’s tree removal
mitigation objectives while achieving an appropriate and sustainable planting plan. Adjusted
mitigation numbers can benefit the community forest by encouraging proper species, planting
numbers, sizes, and spacing for site conditions, resulting in a long-term asset for everyone involved.
108
5 | Page
100% Mitigation – A tree scoring an Excellent or Good Condition Rating.
50% Mitigation – A tree scoring a Fair Condition Rating.
0% Mitigation – A dead tree or scoring a Poor or Very Poor Condition Rating.
OBSERVATIONS & DISCUSSION
SITE DESCRIPTION
350/360 Lake Avenue is a residential property located in the west end of Aspen, Colorado. The property
has been partially redeveloped with a deep excavation and soil retention systems on the east side of the
property and undisturbed flat ground on the west side of the property. The eastern property boundary
abuts Hallam Lake, to the south is a single-family home, and to the north and west, City rights of way
along Lake and Gillespie Avenues. The proximity to Hallam Lake requires the eastern portion of the
property to adhere to the Hallam Lake Bluff review section of Aspen’s Municipal Code (Section
26.435.060). The Code specifies this area as an environmentally sensitive area and defines specific
requirements for vegetation management and land use. For the purposes of this report, no activity
within these sensitive areas was considered based upon the limits of construction activities shown in
the proposed scope of work provided by Design Workshop.
TREE OBSERVATIONS
Each tree was visually evaluated and entered into the attached tree inventory worksheet. The
following information pertains to the tree observations acquired in the field during the inventory
process.
Several trees on the site have codominant growth structures originating at grade level or within their
canopies. This type of growth occurs when 2 or more stems originate from a single point of origin, or
when 2 or more stems originate at grade level in close proximity to one another. Over time, these
stems increase in size and fill the space that previously existed between the stems to create what is
known as bark inclusions. When this happens, competing forces are exerted on the codominant stems
and can lead to structural failure of one or more stems. Though failure is not certain, the likelihood of
failure in these species of trees with codominant structure increases under snow and wind loading.
Two of the spruce trees in the northeast portion of the property have been significantly impacted by
excavation and soil retention systems installed within the past 6 years. Excavation occurred within 4-5
feet of their trunks. Twig and branch dieback were noted during my assessment. Further impacts to
these trees will likely cause structural failure or rapid decline in overall health. These trees did not
receive aluminum tags, nor were they measured, due to snow depths and proximity to the open
excavation on site. They are shown on the attached survey with a red ‘X’ on each.
109
6 | Page
Overcrowding on the west and north portions of the property and rights of way has resulted in trees
competing for resources such as light, water, and nutrients. Due to this competition, specifically for
light, several trees have developed asymmetrical canopies and branch structures atypical for the
species. The loss of live foliage in these asymmetric canopies can lead to mortality of outcompeted
trees as well as overall poor aesthetics when a neighboring tree is removed. Competition for resources
can also cause stress within individual trees and leave them prone to secondary insect and disease
pathogens.
The group of aspens just outside the northern property boundary are within 1-3 feet of the proposed
limits of excavation. Excavation greater than 6-8 inches in this area will likely have significant health
and structural impacts to this group of trees. It is likely that the City Forester will require some type of
exploratory work along the limits of excavation here if the trees are to be preserved. The use of
pneumatic excavation techniques (air spading), will be necessary to remove soil while safely exposing
tree roots. Once roots are exposed, a qualified arborist and the City Forester can evaluate the root
systems of these trees and better understand the impacts to the trees posed by the proposed
construction activities.
The mature cottonwood trees on the Hallam Lake Bluff side of the property are well outside the
proposed limits of disturbance. Cottonwoods are exceptionally tolerant of positive grade changes and
similarly tolerant of excavations at this proposed distance from their trunks. Though their driplines
extend into the proposed project area, if grade changes are kept within the limits of disturbance shown
currently, these trees will likely not require any special exploration by the City Forester.
The trees located south of the property, along the proposed driveway, vary in proximity to the limits of
disturbance. This group of trees consists of young/medium aged aspen, lodgepole pine, and blue
spruce in good condition. This condition rating is based upon a limited view of the trees due to the
soundproofing wall. Excavation is proposed within the dripline of these trees, and since the trees are on
the neighboring private property, it is likely that the City Forester will require air spading to evaluate
root structures of these trees. If excavation can be limited to a depth of 6 inches, or if the grade can be
raised no more than 6 inches to accommodate the new driveway, it’s possible that the City Forester will
forego the need for air spading.
Similarly to the trees along the proposed driveway, the spruce located on the north and west side of the
property will incur excavations within their driplines. In addition to the below ground impacts to several
of these trees, it is important to also note the need to significantly prune portions of their canopies to
afford space for above ground structures. These trees are irrigated via an above ground irrigation
system. If future construction efforts require the removal of this irrigation system, or if the system
becomes nonfunctional, other means of supplemental watering of these trees will be required to avoid
an overall decline in their health.
Over the past 3-5 years, there has been an increase in Ips (Ips spp.) and Spruce bark beetle
(Dendroctonus rufipennis) populations in the Roaring Fork Valley, including Aspen proper. Mature
spruce trees on this property that may be subjected to construction activities within their critical root
110
7 | Page
zones (an area around a tree that is 2.5 times its diameter, measured in feet) have a higher likelihood of
being stressed from those construction activities. Stressed trees are more likely to be targeted by bark
beetles. Preventative treatments can be employed to lower the likelihood of attack.
DISCUSSION
The following information pertains to the trees identified to have conditions that lead to a reduction in
mitigation value and/or are relevant to the construction efforts proposed. Trees with a condition rating
of ‘Good’ and not impacted by the current construction plans can be found in the tree inventory table
and should be considered viable candidates for retention throughout the project.
Trees #59, 62, 66, 69, 72, 79, 81, and 86 are in Poor condition due to one or more of the issues
described in the tree observation section above. Comments for individual trees can be found on the
tree inventory sheet attached to this document. All of these trees should be considered for removal
regardless of any proposed construction activities.
Trees #57, 60, 62, 64, 70, 73-78, 80, and 82 are in Good or Fair condition but are within or in close
proximity to the proposed excavation. The extent of root loss and/or canopy loss to accommodate the
construction activities in this area will result in structural failure or a rapid decline in overall health.
Spruce are very shallow rooted trees, with the majority of their root system found within the top 6-14
inches of soil in this area of Aspen. Air spading these trees to evaluate root systems will be an
expensive process, and based upon my experience with similarly sized spruce trees in this soil type in
Aspen, result in the need to remove the trees or push the limit of excavation further from the trees. A
general rule defining the structural and critical roots zones of trees, widely accepted in the field of
arboriculture was provided in the research done by Dr. Kim Coder in 2014 at the University of Georgia.
In his research, the structural root zone of a tree can be defined as a circle with a diameter measured in
feet that is 0.9 times the diameter of the tree measured in inches. For instance, tree #67 has a diameter
of 14 inches, resulting in a structural root zone with a diameter of 12.6 feet. The proposed limit of
excavation is approximately 4 feet from this tree and will drastically impact the structural root zone.
My experience has shown that severing roots in a linear fashion this close to blue spruce trees in Aspen
will result in a spiraling branch dieback pattern within the canopy and/or structural failure of the tree
during wind or snow loading events. The spruce trees discussed in this paragraph that are in Fair
condition are not likely candidates for a 100% reduction in their mitigation value but may be considered
for a reduction in value of up to 50% if removal is requested and approved.
Trees #58, 61, 63, 65, 67-68, 71, and 83-85 are far enough away from the proposed excavation to
make them viable candidates for retention. Air spading to explore their root zones and actual impacts
from the proposed excavation will likely be required by the City Forester. Overall health and age of
these trees increase the likelihood of survival, especially if lateral and fibrous roots 2 inches in diameter
or less are the only roots found in the area of excavation. Use of growth regulators, plant health care
visits, supplemental irrigation, insect/disease control, and physical barriers during construction will also
play a critical role is successfully preserving these trees.
111
8 | Page
The 2 spruce trees in the northeast portion of the property, shown with red X’s on them in the survey
data are declining due to root loss from previous excavations. These trees will not withstand further
impacts from construction and should be considered for removal.
The group of aspen trees along the northern property line are not candidates for retention if excavation
occurs where it is currently shown. Any dig of more than 6 inches in depth will require removal of these
trees due to the amount of root loss incurred. Rapid decline in overall health, insect/disease infestation,
and/or structural failure during wind loading events should be anticipated if disturbance occurs as
shown in current plans.
The neighbor’s trees south of the proposed driveway will likely require air spading or a change of plan to
raise grade instead of excavating. The westmost group of aspens are the closest to the limit of
disturbance and will incur the heaviest impacts by construction efforts. The City Forester will most
likely require air spading adjacent to these aspens. The spruce and lodgepole pines are further from the
excavation line but still close enough that air spading here will be necessary. Grade changes, positive or
negative, of less than 6 inches could relax the requirement for exploration around these trees. If air
spading results in the need to remove any of these trees, approval from this neighbor will be required in
writing before the City Forester will entertain the possibility of removal. I would strongly encourage the
team to seek options to minimize disturbance within these trees’ driplines unless a conversation with
the neighbor has resulted in a favorable agreement to proceed regardless of impacts to these trees.
Insect control will be important for the trees impacted by construction activities. Specifically, the
spruce trees should be treated to prevent attack by bark beetles. This can be achieved by spraying the
trees’ trunks and large branches annually throughout the project timeline, or if the trees are too large
with dense canopies, they can be treated via trunk injection which provides 2-years of beetle
prevention. In addition to the beetle preventative actions, base level plant health care actions and
providing supplemental irrigation should be considered. All of the trees on site and along the property
boundaries rely on a functioning irrigation system for their water needs. When that system is disrupted
due to construction, water must be delivered to the trees via some other means during the months of
May through October. Plant health care visits provided by trained professionals 3 times per growing
season will provide beneficial results during and after the construction process. These visits will address
any leaf feeding insect issues such as aphids and mites and provide timely information for any needed
changes in the irrigation regime, tree protection measures, and fertility needs.
The mitigation value for all the trees tagged in this report totals $149,684.98, per the City of Aspen’s
tree valuation equation. The suggested mitigation value for the trees after applying the condition
ratings that I’ve assigned totals $92,130.15. Final mitigation values are defined by the City Forester as
part of the formal tree removal permit process.
112
9 | Page
PHOTOS
Photo 1. Group of spruce
trees along western
property boundary;
approximate excavation
limit staking shown
113
10 | Page
Photo 2. Spruce with
codominant growth
pattern in main stem
114
11 | Page
Photo 3. Aspen group on along
northern property boundary;
limit of disturbance at fence line
115
12 | Page
Photo 4. Existing excavation close
to 2 spruce in northeast corner
116
13 | Page
CONCLUSIONS
Based upon my assessment, trees #59, 62, 66, 69, 72, 79, 81, and 86 are in Poor condition and should be
considered for removal regardless of future construction planning. Trees #57, 60, 62, 64, 70, 73-78, 80,
82, and the group of aspens at the northern property boundary are close enough to the proposed
excavation line that their structural root zones will be significantly impacted. These trees will not likely
survive the proposed construction impacts. Trees #58, 61, 63, 65, 67-68, 71, and 83-85 are likely
candidates for preservation due to their distance from the excavation and their overall health/age class.
Spruce trees that are adjacent to construction activities may be targeted by bark beetles and should be
considered for preventative treatments. Specific protection measures will be required by the City
Forester for trees with excavation occurring within their drip lines and will likely require pneumatic
excavation to better understand impacts to their root systems. Trees on the neighboring property to
the south will likely require the same exploratory work as mentioned above.
All tree removals require a permit from the City of Aspen and final mitigation requirements are
determined by the City Forester or his designee. No tree removal is allowed on the neighboring
property without consent from the property owner and a permit granted by the City of Aspen Parks
Department.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I recommend removing the trees listed in Poor condition found within the property boundaries of
350/360 Lake Avenue. Trees identified to be too close to the proposed excavation should be removed
or changes to the limits of disturbance implemented to reduce impacts to these trees’ root zones.
Mature spruce trees should receive bark beetle preventative treatments prior to any construction
activities commencing. Air spading will need to be done along the proposed driveway and at the limits
of disturbance beneath the spruce trees to be preserved on the north and west sides of the project. The
group of aspens on the north property boundary will not survive grade changes of more than 6 inches. I
recommend discussing the removal of these trees with the City since they are in the public right of way,
or ensuring grade changes within their driplines are minimized to less than 6 inches. I also recommend
preparing a tree preservation plan to ensure the long-term survival of the trees to be kept through the
construction process. Items to be considered in this plan should include supplemental irrigation, plant
health care evaluations, physical barrier (fencing) locations, and fertilization needs.
.
117
350/360 Lake Avenue Tree Inventory Aspen Tree Service February, 2023
ID#Species DBH (inches) Mitigation
Value ($) Health
Suggested
Mitigation
Value ($)
Comments
Possible
Preservation
(Y/N)
57 Blue spruce 16 $ 9,244.16 Good $ 9,244.16 Excavation approx. 2' south of trunk N
58 Blue spruce 13 $ 6,102.59 Fair $ 3,051.30 Overcrowded; excavation approx. 5' east of trunk Y
59 Blue spruce 9 $ 2,924.91 Poor $ - Overcrowded; defect in trunk at base N
60 Blue spruce 17 $ 10,435.79 Good $ 10,435.79 N
61 Blue spruce 13.5 $ 6,581.05 Fair $ 3,290.52 Asymmetric canopy from overcrowding Y
62 Blue spruce 11 $ 4,369.31 Poor $ - Codominant stems @ 18'; approx. 5' from excavation N
63 Blue spruce 14.5 $ 7,592.13 Fair $ 3,796.06 Asymmetric canopy from overcrowding Y
64 Blue spruce 15 $ 8,124.75 Fair $ 4,062.38 Asymmetric canopy from overcrowding; approx. 3' from excavation N
65 Blue spruce 11 $ 4,369.31 Fair $ 2,184.66 Asymmetric canopy from overcrowding Y
66 Blue spruce 6.5 $ 1,525.65 Poor $ - Severely overcrowded; approx. 3' from excavation N
67 Blue spruce 14 $ 7,077.56 Good $ 7,077.56 Approximately 4' from excavation Y
68 Blue spruce 11 $ 4,369.31 Fair $ 2,184.66 Asymmetric canopy from overcrowding Y
69 Blue spruce 4.5 $ 731.23 Poor $ - Severely overcrowded, no future in stand of trees N
70 Blue spruce 11.5 $ 4,775.55 Fair $ 2,387.77 Asymmetric canopy; approx. 1' from excavation N
71 Blue spruce 17.5 $ 11,058.69 Good $ 11,058.69 Y
72 Blue spruce 9 $ 2,924.91 Poor $ - Twig dieback in canopy; declining health; likely root damage N
73 Blue spruce 7.5 $ 2,031.19 Fair $ 1,015.59 Overcrowded; approx. 2' from excavation N
74 Blue spruce 11.5 $ 4,775.55 Fair $ 2,387.77 Asymmetric canopy from overcrowding; at excavation line N
75 Blue spruce 15 $ 8,124.75 Fair $ 4,062.38 Approx. 3' from excavation N
76 Blue spruce 14.5 $ 7,592.13 Fair $ 3,796.06 Asymmetric canopy from overcrowding; approx. 3' from excavation N
77 Blue spruce 10 $ 3,611.00 Fair $ 1,805.50 Overcrowded; asymmetric crown; within excavation limit N
78 Blue spruce 12 $ 5,199.84 Fair $ 2,599.92 Overcrowded; asymmetric crown; within excavation limit N
79 Blue spruce 9 $ 2,924.91 Poor $ - Overcrowded; little to no live crown remaining; within excavation limit N
80 Blue spruce 12.5 $ 5,642.19 Good $ 5,642.19 Within excavation limit N
81 Blue spruce 6.5 $ 1,525.65 Poor $ - Top broken out; terrible structure; within excavation limit N
82 Blue spruce 12 $ 5,199.84 Good $ 5,199.84 Approx. 2' from excavation N
83 Blue spruce 9 $ 2,924.91 Fair $ 1,462.46 Overcrowded; asymmetric crown Y
84 Blue spruce 7.5 $ 2,031.19 Fair $ 1,015.59 Overcrowded; asymmetric crown Y
85 Blue spruce 11 $ 4,369.31 Good $ 4,369.31 Y
86 Blue spruce 6.5 $ 1,525.65 Poor $ - Outcompeted by surrounding canopies; suppressed growth, no future N
Totals 149,684.98$ 92,130.15$
Attachment A
14 | Page
118
2'
-
1
"
350 360 LAKE AVE
ASPEN, CO
EXHIBIT - LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE (SURVEY)
1.16.2023NORTH0
ORIGINAL SCALE:
10 20 40
1"=20'-00"
DESIGN WORKSHOP
Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning
1390 Lawrence Street · Suite 100 · Denver, CO 80204 · 303-623-5186
T
O
P
O
F
B
L
U
F
F
LA
K
E
A
V
E
LI
M
I
T
S
O
F
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
A
N
C
E
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
L
I
M
I
T
S
O
F
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
A
N
C
E
PROPOSED TERRACE
PROPOSED DRIVEWAY
PREVIOUS LIMITS
OF DISTURBANCE
(FLAGGED ON SITE)
UPDATED LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE (NOT
FLAGGED ON SITE)
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73 74
75 76 82
77
83
78
84
79
85
80
86
81 X
X
Attachment B
15 | Page 119
Exhibit A10
120
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020
LAND USE APPLICATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTIVATIVE:
Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions
Review: Administrative or Board Review
Net Leasable square footage Lodge Pillows Free Market dwelling units
Affordable Housing dwelling units Essential Public Facility square footage
FEES DUE: $
Pre-Application Conference Summary
Signed Fee Agreement
HOA Compliance form
All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary
Name:
Address:
Phone#: email:
Address:
Phone #: email:
Name:
Project Name and Address:
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)
Required Land Use Review(s):
Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields:
BendonAdams
300 So. Spring St #202; Aspen, CO 81611
970.925.2855 chris@bendonadams.com
Previously developed parcel with a partially-built residence consisting of a legally-established non-
conforming double basement. Proposed continuation of two-level basement and completion of new home
x
x
x
x
1 (existing development right)
Have you included the following?
na
na na
4,550
360 Lake Avenue; Aspen
2735-121-32-001
Lake Avenue Partners LLC, a Texas limited liability company
690 s. Peytonville Ave.; Southlake, TX 76092
na
genshaft@wcrlegal.com 970–544–7006
Exhibit B1
121
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
May 12, 2023
Amy Simon
Planning Director
City of Aspen
427 Rio Grande Place
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 360 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO
Ms. Simon:
Please accept this letter authorizing BendonAdams LLC to represent our ownership
interests in Lot 1 of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split, also known as 360 Lake Avenue,
and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals
for the property.
If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Property – 360 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO 81611
Legal Description – Lot 1; Erdman Partnership Lot Split; Pitkin County
Parcel ID – 2735-121-32-001
Owner – Lake Avenue Partners LLC, a Texas limited liability company
Kind Regards,
Ben Genshaft, Authorized Signatory
Lake Avenue Partners LLC, a Texas limited liability company
c/o Waas Cambell Rivera Johnson & Velasquez
420 East Main Street #210
Aspen, CO 81611
genshaft@wcrlegal.com
970.315.5588
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1F8B79E9-125D-48B0-A781-20EA4A579527
122
CONSENT OF THE SOLE MEMBER AND MANAGERS
OF
LAKE AVENUE PARTNERS, LLC
The undersigned, being the sole Member and Managers of LAKE AVENUE
PARTNERS, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (the “Company”), do hereby consent to
the following actions in writing, without meeting:
RESOLVED, that the Company be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and
deliver any documents and materials related to the development or redevelopment
of, and construction of improvements upon, the property owned by the Company
known as 350/360 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 (the “Property”) including,
without limitation, any land use and development applications, agreements,
contracts, plats, consents, proposals, statements, certificates, easements and
(collectively, the “Land Use and Development Documents”);
RESOLVED, that Ben Genshaft (the “Authorized Signatory”), is authorized to
execute and deliver, to the City of Aspen and any other interested parties, any of
the Land Use and Development Documents;
RESOLVED, that the execution and delivery by the Authorized Signatory of the
Land Use and Development Documents or any other document, and the taking of
any other action in connection with any of the preceding matters shall evidence the
approval thereof and the authority therefor and the approval and ratification by the
member of the Company and by the Company of such agreement, certificate,
document or action;
RESOLVED, that all actions of the Authorized Signatory taken in connection with
any of the foregoing transactions prior to the date hereof are hereby ratified,
confirmed, adopted, accepted and approved as acts of the Company;
RESOLVED, the Authorized Signatory is executing the Land Use and
Development Documents on behalf of the Company and at the direction of the
Managers and shall have no responsibility or liability in connection with the
preparation or content of the Land Use and Development Documents or other
materials; and
RESOLVED, that this consent may be executed in any number of counterparts, all
of which when executed and delivered shall have the force and effect of an original.
Signatures may be original, electronic or facsimile.
[signature page follows]
DocuSign Envelope ID: 44ED4993-7F5C-47FE-A151-65291A2FD16E
123
- 2 -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands as of the latest date
set forth below.
MEMBER:
Date: _____________________ AKQ Investments II, LP, a Texas limited
Partnership
By:
Thomas R. McKelvey, Partner
By:
Lisa C. McKelvey, Partner
MANAGERS:
Date: _____________________
By:
Thomas R. McKelvey, Manager
By: ___________________________
Lisa C. McKelvey, Manager
DocuSign Envelope ID: 44ED4993-7F5C-47FE-A151-65291A2FD16E
5/11/2023
5/11/2023
124
Exhibit B4
125
Land Title Guarantee Company
Customer Distribution
PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when
initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions.
Order Number:Q62014871 Date: 12/27/2022
Property Address:360 LAKE AVE & 350 LAKE AVE, ASPEN, CO 81611
PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS
For Closing Assistance For Title Assistance
Land Title Roaring Fork Valley Title
Team
533 E HOPKINS #102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 927-0405 (Work)
(970) 925-0610 (Work Fax)
valleyresponse@ltgc.com
Seller/Owner
LAKE AVENUE PARTNERS LLC
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Agent for Seller
BENDONADAMS
Attention: CHRIS BENDON
300 S SPRING STREET SUITE 202
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-2855 (Work)
chris@bendonadams.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Exhibit B5
126
Land Title Guarantee Company
Estimate of Title Fees
Order Number:Q62014871 Date: 12/27/2022
Property Address:360 LAKE AVE & 350 LAKE AVE, ASPEN, CO 81611
Parties:TO BE DETERMINED
LAKE AVENUE PARTNERS, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY
Visit Land Title's Website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices.
Estimate of Title insurance Fees
"TBD" Commitment $265.00
Total $265.00
If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at
closing.
Thank you for your order!
Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants
conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal
assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the effect of these documents on your
property.
Chain of Title Documents:
Pitkin county recorded 05/27/2022 under reception no.
687908
Plat Map(s):
Pitkin county recorded 11/26/1990 at book 25 page 42
127
Copyright 2006-2022 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing
as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the
American Land Title Association.
Property Address:
360 LAKE AVE & 350 LAKE AVE, ASPEN, CO 81611
1.Effective Date:
12/16/2022 at 5:00 P.M.
2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured:
"TBD" Commitment
Proposed Insured:
TO BE DETERMINED
$0.00
3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
A FEE SIMPLE
4.Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in:
LAKE AVENUE PARTNERS, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
5.The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
LOTS 1 AND 2,
ERDMAN LOT SPLIT,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED NOVEMBER 26, 1990 IN PLAT BOOK 25 AT PAGE 42.
COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule A
Order Number:Q62014871
128
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part I
(Requirements)
Order Number: Q62014871
All of the following Requirements must be met:
This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this
Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company
may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions.
Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured.
Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company.
Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or
both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records.
1.WRITTEN CONFIRMATION THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY FOR
LAKE AVENUE PARTNERS, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RECORDED MAY 27, 2022
UNDER RECEPTION NO. 687907 IS CURRENT.
NOTE: SAID INSTRUMENT DISCLOSES THOMAS R. MCKELVEY AND LISA C. MCKELVEY AS THE
MANAGERS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING, ENCUMBERING OR OTHERWISE
AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF SAID ENTITY. IF THIS INFORMATION IS NOT
ACCURATE, A CURRENT STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST BE RECORDED.
THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO.
129
This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any
document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction,
or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender
identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be
ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land.
2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.
3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that
would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public
Records.
4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by
law and not shown by the Public Records.
5.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the
public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed
insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment.
6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that
levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public
agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown
by the records of such agency or by the Public Records.
7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the
issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water.
8.RIGHT OF THE PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM,
SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES HEREBY GRANTED, AS
RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED JUNE 08, 1888 IN BOOK 55 AT PAGE 2.
9.EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE PLAT
OF ERDMAN LOT SPLIT RECORDED NOVEMBER 26, 1990 IN PLAT BOOK 25 AT PAGE 42.
10.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF ASPEN
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, NO. 12, SERIES OF 2013 RECORDED MAY 24, 2013 AS
RECEPTION NO. 599796.
11.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF ASPEN
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, NO. 22, SERIES OF 2015 RECORDED DECEMBER 21, 2015 AS
RECEPTION NO. 625748.
12.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION
RECORDED JULY 26, 2016 AS RECEPTION NO. 630942.
13.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF NOTICE OF APPROVAL RECORDED JUNE
29, 2020 AS RECEPTION NO. 665443.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part II
(Exceptions)
Order Number: Q62014871
130
14.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF ORDINANCE BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL,
NO. 5, SERIES OF 2014 RECORDED MARCH 3, 2022 AS RECEPTION NO. 685618.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part II
(Exceptions)
Order Number: Q62014871
131
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY
DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that:
Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the
clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least
one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that,
the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or
filing information at the top margin of the document.
Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters
which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for
recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title
Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal
documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy
when issued.
Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of
Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following
conditions:
No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or
agreed to pay.
The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A)
A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in
which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides
written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real
property).
(B)
The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of
County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor.
(C)
The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a
condominium or townhouse unit.
(A)
No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land
described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months.
(B)
The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and
material-men's liens.
(C)
The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D)
If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within
six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include:
disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the
contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company,
and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the
Company.
(E)
132
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given:
This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface
estate, in Schedule B-2.
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or
information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may
include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance
company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for
the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award
payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of
Regulatory Agencies.
Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing
protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction.
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-11(4)(a)(1), Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other
documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for
any document.
That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the
surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other
minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and
(A)
That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's
permission.
(B)
133
JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY
LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND
OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance
Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company.
We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state
privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence
is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized
access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information").
In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from:
applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based
transaction management system;
your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others;
a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction;
and
The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from
our affiliates and non-affiliates.
Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows:
We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in
order to provide products and services to you.
We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the
course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to
provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction.
We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your
Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion.
Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action.
We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal
Information.
WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT
IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW.
Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We
may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for
example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your
Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is
needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you.
Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy
policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration
Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction
thereof.
134
Commitment For Title Insurance
Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
NOTICE
IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE
POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS
COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT.
THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER
REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING
ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND
CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED.
THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE
CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. .
COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY
Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance
Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is
effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the
specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met
within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end.
COMMITMENT CONDITIONS
1. DEFINITIONS
2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates
and the Company’s liability and obligation end.
3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without:
4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND
The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or
other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The
Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment.
5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY
i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements;
ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or
iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment.
“Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a)
“Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any
property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues,
alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy.
(b)
“Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c)
“Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company
pursuant to this Commitment.
(d)
“Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e)
“Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this
Commitment.
(f)
“Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters
relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge.
(g)
“Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h)
the Notice;(a)
the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b)
the Commitment Conditions;(c)
Schedule A;(d)
Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e)
Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f)
a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g)
The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the
Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed
Insured’s good faith reliance to:
(a)
The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the
matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing.
(b)
The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the
Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured.
(c)
The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment
Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount.
(d)
The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e)
135
6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT
7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT
The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the
Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services.
8. PRO-FORMA POLICY
The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma
policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure.
9. ARBITRATION
The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of
either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at
http://www.alta.org/arbitration.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown
in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory.
Issued by:
Land Title Guarantee Company
3033 East First Avenue Suite 600
Denver, Colorado 80206
303-321-1880
Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President
This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not
valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II
—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.
Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are
prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association.
In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements
have been met to the satisfaction of the Company.
(f)
In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g)
Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a)
Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b)
Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject
matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral,
express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment.
(c)
The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the
terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy.
(d)
Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e)
When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f)
136
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
April 2020 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
Homeowner Association Compliance Policy
All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association
Compliance Form (this form) certifying the scope of work included in the land use application complies
with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by
the property owner or Attorney representing the property owner.
Property
Owner (“I”):
Name:
Email: Phone No.:
Address of
Property:
(subject of
application)
I certify as follows: (pick one)
□This property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant.
□This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvementsproposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association orcovenant beneficiary.
□This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvementsproposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners association or
covenant beneficiary.
I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the
applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I
understand that this document is a public document.
Owner signature:
Owner printed name:
or,
Attorney signature: date:
Attorney printed name:
Ben Genshaft, Authorized Signatory; Lake Avenue Partners LLC
360 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO 81611
Lot 1; Erdman Partnership Lot Split; Pitkin County
date:
genshaft@wcrlegal.com 970.315.5588
Ben Genshaft, Authorized Signatory
Lake Avenue Partners LLC, a Texas limited liability company
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1F8B79E9-125D-48B0-A781-20EA4A579527
137
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
Please type or print in all caps
Representative Name (if different from Property Owner)
Contact info for billing: e-mail: Phone:
I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2017, review fees for Land Use applications and
payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property
owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application.
For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are
non-refundable.
$. flat fee for . $. flat fee for
$. flat fee for . $. flat fee for
For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not
possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that 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 no-payment. I agree to pay
the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not
render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I
agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly
rates hereinafter stated.
$ deposit for hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
$ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the
deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
City of Aspen:
Phillip Supino, AICP
Community Development Director
City Use:
Fees Due: $ Received $
Case #
Signature:
PRINT Name:
Title:
BendonAdams
An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and
Address of Property:
Property Owner Name:
1300 4
360 Lake Avenue
Lake Avenue Partners LLC
Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to:
c/o BendonAdams; 300 So Spring St. #202; Aspen, CO 81611
chris@bendonadams.com 970.925.2855
975 Parks
3,250 10
325 1
Ben Genshaft, Authorized Signatory
Lake Avenue Partners LLC
a Texas limited liability company
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1F8B79E9-125D-48B0-A781-20EA4A579527
138
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
DATE: November 29th, 2022
PLANNER: Haley Hart, haley.hart@aspen.gov
PROJECT ADDRESS: 360 Lake Ave.
PARCEL ID# 2735-121-32-001
APPLICANT: Chris Bendon, chris@bendonadams.com
DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located in the Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district and is
located in the Hallam Lake Bluff review area. 360 Lake Avenue is Lot 1 of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split.
The lot is accessed from Lake Avenue by an easement. The property received a series of approvals and a
building permit to redevelop the site with a single-family residence. The Planning and Zoning Commission
granted the original approval in 2013 via Resolution No. 12. As part of the redevelopment plan, the property
owner installed storm water and spillway infrastructure in coordination with the City Engineering department
to accommodate drainage from the West End. In 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved an
amended Hallam Lake Bluff approval for a revised design. In 2017 site work stopped and the applicant
requested an extension on the building permit. The applicant worked with the Community Development
department on conditions to keep the building permit active, including periodic site inspections assessing
progress. Around that time, the Applicant was directed to apply for another Hallam Lake Bluff amendment to
incorporate another round of revisions. A Hallam Lake Bluff and Residential Design Standard amendment
was issued in April 2020.
During the building permit review of the change order for the most recent amendment, it was determined the
proposed design did not match the 2020 approvals. The applicant was provided options to receive approval,
and none were pursued at that time. That building permit and all previous approvals are now expired.
The applicant is interested in pursuing approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission for a new design.
All above grade portions of the development are subject to current code requirements. All constructed and
inspected elements, including a double basement that no longer complies with the code, are considered
legally established non-conformities. Those elements will be allowed to continue as long as they are not
altered.
In addition to seeking approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission for a Hallam Lake Bluff Review, the
applicant is requesting a Residential Design Standard variation. At this time, the applicant has not submitted
plans; with no plans staff cannot identify specific standards. The applicant will need to identify and satisfy the
standards through Section 26.410.030. The structure is subject to current Residential Design Standard review.
Once an application is submitted, staff will review the design for compliance with all standards. If variations
are required, staff will identify the review process at that time.
The application should include documentation of all existing development, including drainage infrastructure,
and all proposed elements that are not constructed. Any proposed changes from the previously approved and
constructed plans that would alter the constructed elements would be subject to review under current code
requirements.
The new application is subject to current code requirements and impact fees. Affordable housing mitigation
will be based on current GMQS code requirements and calculations. The property is also subject to current
parking requirements, although it is exempt from TIA.
Exhibit B8
139
427 Rio Grande Place | Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | Phone: 970-920-5000 | aspen.gov
The application will be referred to Parks and Engineering for review prior to the Planning and Zoning hearing.
RELEVANT ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS:
Section Number Section Title
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.312.030 Non-Conforming Structures
26.410.030 Residential Design Standards
26.435.060 Hallam Lake Bluff Review
26.515.040 Parking Requirements
26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential Zone District (R-6)
For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below:
Land Use Application Land Use Code
REVIEW BY: Staff for determination of complete application
Engineering and Parks for referral comments
Planning and Zoning Commission for Approval
REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW(S):
Hallam Lake Bluff Review
Residential Design Standards
PUBLIC HEARING: Yes, Planning and Zoning Commission
PLANNING FEES: $3,250 for 10 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/
refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.)
REFERRAL FEES: ENGINEERING: $325 for 1 billable hour of staff time (additional/lesser hours will be
billed/refunded at a rate of $325 per hour).
PARKS: $975 flat fee
TOTAL DEPOSIT: $4,550
APPLICATION CHECKLIST – Please submit one paper copy of the following:
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.
HOA Compliance form.
A vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
Site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation
showing the current status, certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado.
The survey should show the Hallam Lake Bluff top of slope and 15’ setback.
140
427 Rio Grande Place | Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | Phone: 970-920-5000 | aspen.gov
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 approval associated with the property.
Written responses to all review criteria.
Completed Residential Design Standard Checklist.
Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the following will then need to be submitted:
Total deposit for review of the application.
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based
on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or
may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right.
141
1{,
e
e
ORDINANCE NO. 66
SERIES OF 1990)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING SUBDIVISION
EXEMPTION FOR THE ERDMAN PARTNERSHIP LOT SPLIT, DESCRIBED IN
METES AND BOUNDS, AT THE S. E. CORNER OF GILLESPIE ST. AND LAKE
AVE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 7-1003 of the Aspen Land Use
Code (revision date August 1989), a Lot Split is a subdivlslon
exemption by the City council; and
WHEREAS, The Erdman Partnership, represented by Donnelley
Erdman, has submitted an application for the lot split of a
32,855.5 square foot parcel described ln metes and bounds in the
SE 1/4 NE 1/4 of Sectlon 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 west of
the slxth P.M., City of Aspen); and
WHEREAS, the Engineering Department, having reviewed the
appllcatlon has made referral comments and addendums; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Office, having reviewed the
appllcation pursuant to section 7-1003, and reviewing referral
comments from Engineering, recommends approval with the followlng
conditions:
1. One joint driveway access will be allowed for both lots via
the 20' access easement.
2. Prlor to flling a final plat the applicant shall agree to
Join any future improvement districts.
3. The plat shall lndicate the edge of street pavement or curb
line and the existing fence and dralnage ditch along the
1
Exhibit C1
142
1';-
south boundary of the property.
4.The final plat shall indicate that prior to issuance of a
building permit for development on either lot, the applicant
shall submit a drainage plan to the Englneering Department
and do any necessary improvements to the dltch along the
south boundary of the parcel.
5. The following FAR and site coverage limits will be:
Lot 1: FAR maximum - 4,468 s.f.; site coverage - 20% (4,791
s. f.)
Lot 2: FAR maximum - 3,449 s.f.(access easement is
subtracted from lot area for calculating FAR); Slte Coverage
30.34% (2,700 s.f.)
6.An Accessory Dwelling Unit must be included on each lot for
faI.
WhlCh development lS proposed as a requirement of this Lot
split. Each Accessory Dwelllng Unit must comply with the
Housing Authority's requirements and must receive
Conditlonal Use approval by the Aspen Planning and Zoning
commission.
7. Prior to issuance of any building permits, Deed Restrictlons
for the Accessory Dwelling Units shall be approved by the
Housing Authority and recorded by the Pitkin County Clerk
and Recorder's Office.
8. Development proposed for any lot(s) resulting from this lot
split shall conform to the terms and requlrements of the
Hallam Lake Bluff Environmentally Sensltive Area (ESA) if
applicable.
i'
2
143
f"
re
e
9.A Subdivision Exemption Agreement listing the conditions of
approval shall be included as a note section on the final
plat.
10. The f1nal plat will be signed by the Planning Office and
recorded by the city Clerk only upon complete sat1sfaction
of all of the above cond1tions.
WHEREAS, the Aspen city Council having cons1dered the
Planning Office's recommendations for the lot split does wish to
grant the requested Subd1vision Exemption for the Erdman Lot
Split.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1:
That it does hereby grant a Subdiv1sion Exemption for a Lot
Split, with the condit1ons recommended by the Planning Office, to
the 32,855.5 s.f. parcel described 1n this ordinance.
Section 2:
That the City Clerk be and hereby 1S directed, upon the
adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance 1n
the office of the pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Section 3:
A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the ,;)"}
day of () u~ ,1990 at 5:00 P.M. in the city Council Chambers,
Aspen C1ty Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days pr10r to which
a hearing of public not1ce of the same shall be published in a
3
144
145
Exhibit C2
146
ORDINANCE NO. 5
SERIES OF 2014)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
66,APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS 6 AND 7 OF ORDINANCESERIES1990, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE ERDMAN PARTNERSHIP LOT SPLIT,LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: LOTS 1 & 2, ERDMAN LOT SPLIT, ACCORDI NGTHEPLATTHEREOFRECORDEDNOVEMBER26, 1990 IN PLAT BOOK 25
TOPAGE42, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. 25 AT
PARCEL IDs: 2735-121-32-001, 2735-121-32-002
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from BLLC, represented by Steev Wilson, Forum Phi, requesting a
ell
to
Ordinance 66, Series of 1990 which established the Erdman Partnership Lot Split; and,
amendment to
WHEREAS, the property is zoned Medium Density Residential, R-6; and,
WHEREAS,
upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, theCommunityDevelopmentDepartment
recommended in favor of the proposed amendment; and,
WHEREAS,
pursuant to Section 26.480.080, the City Council may approveAmendment, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering comments from Sthe die neon
ralpublic, a recommendation from the Community Development Director, and recommendationsfromrelevantreferralagencies; and, recommendations
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the developmenttheapplicableprovisionsoftheMunicipalCodeasidentifiedherein, has eiewedandpconsider
under
the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies,
tieredhastakenandconsideredpubliccommentatapublichearing; and,
g and
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on March 10, 2014, the City Council a r
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2014, by a three to one (3 — 1) vote a
pP ovedOrdinance66, Series of 1990 through a Subdivision Amendment; and,
pproving an amendment to
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicabledevelopmentstandards; and, pp able
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotionofpublichealth, safety, and welfare. p ohon
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITYASPENASFOLLOWS:OF
Ordinance No 5, Series 2014
Page 1 of 3
Exhibit C3
147
Section 1: Approvals
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, CityCouncilherbyamendsConditions6and7ofOrdinance66, Series of 1990 to state:
6. Condition 6 is hereby stricken in its entirety.
7. Condition 7 is hereby stricken in its entirety.
Section 2: Severabilitv
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reasonheldinvalidorunconstitutionalinacourtofcompetentjurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remainingportionsthereof.
Section 3: Existing Litigation
This ordinance 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: Approvals
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before
the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, 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 5: Public Hearin
A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the lot"
day of March, 2014, at a meeting of theAspenCityCouncilcommencingat5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall,Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City CounciloftheCityofAspenonthe1Ot"
day of February, 2014.
Attest:
4SkadrKathrynS. ch, City Clerk StevMayor
Ordinance No 5, Series 2014
Page 2 of 3 148
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this / day of 2014.
Attest:
r
i
Kathryn S. ch, City Clerk Stev ' Skadron,Mayor
Approved as to form:
m True, City Attorney
Ordinance No 5, Series 2014
Page 3 of 3 149
V 5, ,2:c? 1 tq
Ad Name: 9935997A LE°AL NOTICE
Customer: Aspen (LEGALS) City of
ORDINANCE#
5, S
5,
of 2
PUBLIC
adopted anOrdiniance#5, Series of 2019 was ad pted on first
Your account number: 1013028
Leading
t
the City Conrail ed, ng February 10,2019. This ordinance, if ad ted,will approve al-
losing the application to meet the affordable hous-
ing mutic$t—requires ent by cash-in-Lieu or afford-
able housing credits,the ox in effect at the time
PROOF O F PUBLICATION
of
c i m hermit. The public , 2014 at his ordi-
Hance is scheduled for hk3rch 10, 2014 at 5:00 p.m.
city Hall, 130 South Calera.
To ace,the entire text,go to the city's legal notice
IMI:
w,bill,
http://www.aspenpitkin.can/Ieparurents/Clerk/Le-
gai4bti—/
IF you ouid like a copy FAY, or e-meiled to you,
call td,city clerk's office,42¢2647
Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on February
13, 2014. [99359971
STATE OF COLORADO,
COUNTY OF PITKIN
I,Jim Morgan,do solemnly swear that I am General
Manager of the ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY, that
the same weekly newspaper printed,in whole or in
part and published in the County of Pitkin,State of
Colorado,and has a general circulation therein;that
said newspaper has been published continuouslyand
uninterruptedly in said County of Pitkin for a period
of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior
to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or
advertisement.
The Aspen Times is an accepted legal advertising
medium, only for jurisdictions operating under
Colorado's Home Rule provision.
That the annexed legal notice or advertisement
was published in the regular and entire issue of
every number of said daily newspaper for the
period of 1 consecutive insertions; and that the
first publication of said notice was in the issue of
said newspaper dated 2/13/2014 and that the last
publication of said notice was in the issue of said
newspaper dated 2/13/2014.
In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand
this 02/13/2014.
11G I ?
rT-_.
Jim Morgan,General Manager
Subscribed and sworn to before me,a notary
public in and for the County of Garfield,State of
Colorado this 02/13/2014.
Pamela J.Schultz,Notary Public
Commission expires:November 1,2015
2O
11ky PUe`/
PAMELA J.
SCHULTZ r
Cd
P"
hty COMNSWn Expires 11101015
150
Exhibit C4
15
1
From:Cindy Christensen
To:Chris Bendon
Cc:Garrett Larimer
Subject:RE: 360 Lake Ave ADU restriction
Date:Monday, April 18, 2022 10:59:42 AM
Got it. I will get it recorded on Wednesday and provide a copy to you.
Cindy Christensen
Deputy Director
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA)
18 Truscott Place | Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 920-5050 - Main
(970) 920-5455 - Direct
(970) 920-5580 - Fax
From: Chris Bendon <chris@bendonadams.com>
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 10:24 AM
To: Cindy Christensen <cindy.christensen@aspen.gov>
Cc: Garrett Larimer <garrett.larimer@aspen.gov>
Subject: RE: 360 Lake Ave ADU restriction
Correct, would be good to release both. The Gillespie address isn’t effective as that part of Gillespie
has been vacated. But, the address is still on various property documents.
Best,
Chris
From: Cindy Christensen <cindy.christensen@aspen.gov>
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 10:18 AM
To: Chris Bendon <chris@bendonadams.com>
Cc: Garrett Larimer <garrett.larimer@aspen.gov>
Subject: RE: 360 Lake Ave ADU restriction
I just want to verify that you need both released, but the actual address is 360 Lake Avenue and NOT
201 Gillespie Street.
Cindy Christensen
Deputy Director
Exhibit C5
152
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA)
18 Truscott Place | Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 920-5050 - Main
(970) 920-5455 - Direct
(970) 920-5580 - Fax
From: Chris Bendon <chris@bendonadams.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 5:32 PM
To: Cindy Christensen <cindy.christensen@aspen.gov>
Cc: Garrett Larimer <garrett.larimer@aspen.gov>
Subject: 360 Lake Ave ADU restriction
Hi Cindy – Hope you’re well. We are working for the owners of 360 Lake Ave. There was a house
there, demolished a few years ago, and the property is partially through construction. We are
assisting with a property transaction and are trying to clean up a few items. One item is an ADU
deed restriction that we would like to void. Here’s the history:
1990 lot split approval. There was an existing house on what became lot 1. Condition 6 of
Ord 66 requires an ADU
1990 ADU deed restriction filed – 323854
2000 Amended deed restriction – 440645
2014 Ordinance 5 removes the ADU requirement
House (and ADU) demolished in roughly 2016 or 17.
The ADU restriction is still active and shows on title. Obviously, its not there and its no longer
required. So, we are looking to file a vacation of the deed restriction to cleanse the title. Garrett
Larimer in Planning, copied, is familiar with the property if you want to phone a friend.
Let me know what you would like to see on this. I attached the relevant documents. I can put it
together in a formal request if you would like, with the attachments, etc. Please advise. Thanks!!
Cheers,
Chris Bendon, AICP
BendonAdams
970.925.2855
www.bendonadams.com
153
From:Garrett Larimer
To:Reilly Thimons; Chris Bendon
Subject:RE: 360 Lake
Date:Friday, March 19, 2021 12:05:44 PM
Attachments:image009.png
image010.jpg
image011.jpg
image012.jpg
image001.png
image002.jpg
image003.jpg
image004.jpg
Hi Chris and Reilly,
360 Lake is currently vested through the valid building permit open on the property. So long as the
project continues and the permit remains active, the vesting for the project will continue.
In accordance with City regulations and policies, if a new design is submitted for land use review, any
existing improvement that was approved as part of a previous permit or land use review, and has
been constructed under the current permit, will be treated as an existing improvement. Any
proposed changes from the previously approved and constructed plans that would alter the
constructed elements would be subject to review under current code requirements. The issuance of
a building permit for the new design that does not alter constructed improvements would
memorialize the existing features and their relationship to the new design.
Reach out with any questions.
Thanks,
Garrett
To promote the health and safety of our staff and community and to minimize the spread of COVID-19, Community
Development staff are conducting business by email and phone and are only available in person by appointment.
Contact information for our entire staff and how best to get the services you need can be found on our website:
cityofaspen.com/177/Community-Development. Thank you for your understanding.
The following resources have more information about public health, safety, and COVID-19:
Pitkin County's COVID-19 website
City of Aspen’s COVID-19 website
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's COVID-19 website
Center for Disease Control and Prevention's COVID-19 website
Garrett Larimer
Community Development Department
Senior Planner
130 S. Galena St.
Exhibit C6
154
Aspen, CO 81611
p 970.319.6950
www.cityofaspen.com
www.aspencommunityvoice.com
Notice and Disclaimer:
This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the
sender that you have received the message in error and then delete it. Further, the information or opinions contained in this
email are advisory in nature only and are not binding on the City of Aspen. If applicable, the information and opinions
contain in the email are based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations
that may or may not be accurate. The opinions and information contained herein do not create a legal or vested right or any
claim of detrimental reliance.
From: Reilly Thimons <reilly@bendonadams.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:34 PM
To: Garrett Larimer <garrett.larimer@cityofaspen.com>
Subject: RE: 360 Lake
Hi Garrett,
Do you mind responding with a written confirmation of Jim True’s decision – I want to make sure we
have something to add into our project narrative to keep tracking everything should we need it
R
From: Garrett Larimer <garrett.larimer@cityofaspen.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 3:34 PM
To: Chris Bendon <chris@bendonadams.com>; Reilly Thimons <reilly@bendonadams.com>
Subject: 360 Lake
Hi Chris/Reilly,
I have some direction on 360 Lake review process. Let me know when you would like to meet. I’m
free the rest of today or tomorrow from 11-3.
Thanks,
Garrett
To promote the health and safety of our staff and community and to minimize the spread of COVID-19, Community
Development staff are conducting business by email and phone and are only available in person by appointment.
Contact information for our entire staff and how best to get the services you need can be found on our website:
cityofaspen.com/177/Community-Development. Thank you for your understanding.
The following resources have more information about public health, safety, and COVID-19:
Pitkin County's COVID-19 website
155
City of Aspen’s COVID-19 website
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's COVID-19 website
Center for Disease Control and Prevention's COVID-19 website
Garrett Larimer
Community Development Department
Senior Planner
130 S. Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
p 970.319.6950
www.cityofaspen.com
www.aspencommunityvoice.com
Notice and Disclaimer:
This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the
sender that you have received the message in error and then delete it. Further, the information or opinions contained in this
email are advisory in nature only and are not binding on the City of Aspen. If applicable, the information and opinions
contain in the email are based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations
that may or may not be accurate. The opinions and information contained herein do not create a legal or vested right or any
claim of detrimental reliance.
156
From:Garrett Larimer
To:Chris Bendon
Subject:RE: 360 Lake Ave. basement
Date:Wednesday, May 4, 2022 10:36:15 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image003.png
image009.png
Hi Chris,
Yes, our position is the same and it would be considered a legally established non-conformity, and
subject to those code provisions.
Thanks,
Garrett
Garrett Larimer *Please note that my email has changed to
garrett.larimer@aspen.gov *
Senior Planner | Community Development
(C): 970.319.6950
aspen.gov
My typical in-office hours are Tuesday-Thursday, 9-5. I work remotely Monday & Friday, 9-5.
Our Values: Stewardship | Partnership | Service | Innovation
Notice and Disclaimer:
This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the
sender that you have received the message in error and then delete it. Further, the information or opinions contained in this
email are advisory in nature only and are not binding on the City of Aspen. If applicable, the information and opinions
contain in the email are based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations
that may or may not be accurate. The opinions and information contained herein do not create a legal or vested right or any
claim of detrimental reliance.
From: Chris Bendon <chris@bendonadams.com>
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2022 1:01 PM
To: Garrett Larimer <garrett.larimer@aspen.gov>
Subject: 360 Lake Ave. basement
Hi Garrett – Hope you’re well. Another question on the 360 Lake Ave property for you. How will the
City be treating the existing improvement on the property. We understood form you before, when
we had an active land use case, that the City would be treating the existing double basement as an
existing condition and the hallam lake bluff review would be limited to new or changed features on
the site.
Now that the planning application and building permit are no longer active, will the City still be
treating the existing double basement as an existing condition on the property? Will the non-
157
conforming structure provisions apply to this structure?
Thanks!! Let me know if its easier to talk this through.
Cheers,
Chris Bendon, AICP
BendonAdams
970.925.2855
www.bendonadams.com
158