Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20160105 AGENDA Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING January 05, 2016 4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISIT II. ROLL CALL III. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public IV. MINUTES A. Draft minutes for December 15, 2015 V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Lot 2 Erdman Partnership Lot Split - Residential Design Standards Review VII. OTHER BUSINESS A. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair for 2016 VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 001-2016 Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legaJ notice (affi d avit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clari fications of applicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met. Revised April 2, 2014 Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 1 Mr. Goode, Vice Chair, called the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members Keith Goode, Brian McNellis, Kelly McNicholas Kury, Skippy Mesirow, and Spencer McNight present. Ryan Walterscheid, Jasmine Tygre, Jason Elliott, and Jesse Morris were not present for the meeting. Also present from City staff; Debbie Quinn, Jennifer Phelan and Sara Nadolny. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were no comments. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Phelan wanted to make sure the commissioners were aware that based on the City Council meeting from the previous evening, the City Manager’s office will involve both the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and P&Z in some aspects of the hiring process for the new Community Development Director. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments. MINUTES – December 1, 2015 Mr. McNellis moved to approve the minutes for October 20th and was seconded by Mr. Mesirow. All in favor, motion passed. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST There were no declarations. 360 Lake Ave, - Hallam Lake Bluff Review – Public Hearing Mr. Goode opened the public hearing and turned the floor over to staff. Ms. Quinn stated she had reviewed the affidavits of notice as presented as Exhibit E in the agenda packet and found them appropriate. Ms. Sara Nadolny, Community Development Planner Tech, noted the hearing was to request an amendment to an approved development order regarding Hallam Lake Bluff Review. Specifically, section one of Resolution 12, Series 2013. She then reviewed the location of the property within the R-6 zone district. The current home overlooks ACES and is very close to the edge of the bluff. Part of the bluff was dug away when it was first developed and it would not be in compliance with what could be built today. The existing home was built in 1990, prior to the adoption of the Hallam Lake Bluff Review protection standards. She identified three points within the Hallam Lake Bluff Review standards to keep in mind when reviewing the proposal. P1 IV.A. Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 2 1. Top of Slope Definition – The City Engineer defined the top of the slope in the 2013 approval and the applicant is not contesting that approval. 2. All development within 15 ft of the top of slope should be developed at grade. 3. All development not within 15 ft of the top of slope is to be developed under a 45 degree progressive height limitation angle measured from the top of the slope. Ms. Nadolny then provided a brief history of the lot. In 2013, the applicant underwent the Hallam Lake Bluff Review with P&Z receiving an approval as outlined in resolution 12, series 2013 which was included as Exhibit B in the agenda packet. The plan was to improve upon the nonconforming structure. The first part of a two-fold plan involved reconstructing the top of slope and bring it back to the pre-construction standards. The second part was to remove some sections of the house closest to the bluff and replace them with sections in front of the property. Although this did not bring the entire structure into compliance it was a favorable improvement. There were still issues with the height limitation. The current request does not include any changes to the improved restoration plan. The applicant has been working closely with the Parks and Engineering Departments since the 2013 approval. The applicant is proposing to move the structure approximately 24 ft to the west away from the slope and from the location approved in 2013. Ms. Nadolny stated shifting the structure 24 ft would bring it into compliance with the Hallam Lake Bluff Review. All the structure within the 15 ft setback including a portion of the patio would be at grade and compliant. All the structure outside the 15 ft setback, including the proposed hot tub, will fit within the 45 degree angle measured from the top of slope. Staff has reviewed the application and finds it meets the criteria. This proposal brings the structure into compliance rather than just making it better. Staff fully supports the application and Ms. Nadolny asked if there were any questions. Mr. Goode asked if a site review had been conducted. Mr. Wilson and Ms. Phelan answered that P&Z had previously visited the site. Mr. Goode asked if the piece discussed at the earlier meeting has been moved. Mr. Wilson stated they just received the permit and it has not been moved yet. Ms. McNicholas Kury wanted to confirm nothing was put into effect based on the 2013 approval and now this would be a new set of approvals. Ms. Nadolny stated work has been done with the Engineering Department regarding the drainage plan and nothing with the Parks Department. Ms. Phelan stated the big components were to re-stabilize the bluff because it had been changed by previous construction. There were also a lot of drainage issues they were working on with engineering as well. Parts of the structure were still within the 45 degree height limitation, but it was reducing the nonconformity from 2013. This proposal maintains the bluff, handles the drainage, creates more of a back yard and moves the building. Mr. Steev Wilson, Forum Phi, represents the applicant. He stated the current proposal is much more aggressive than the last application. He provided an image to describe the location of the property in relation to surrounding features. They feel they comply with the bluff review standards and the previous resolution permits them to do what they wish to do which is to re-construct the original portions of the bluff and bring the rest of the structure into compliance with the bluff review standards. Mr. Wilson provided an image of the existing structure and lot. He pointed out the area engineering approved to be reconstituted. He showed where the existing home protrudes over the top of bluff line established in 2013. The previous application moved part of the house back and the current proposal will move the house back even further, almost an entire house length from the original position. P2 IV.A. Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 3 He next displayed a 3D model based on the topographic map received from the surveyor and indicated the piece of the bluff that is missing. This piece will be put back and restored. The drainage issues will also be addressed. He then displayed an image of the original home as it sat on the bluff. He pointed out a lot of the house sticks up though the 45 degree bluff line. The new home moves back considerably and will be under the plane. He provided images of how it had been and what the current application proposes. The owners are excited to have a back yard. He displayed a number of perspectives from around the property demonstrating the house is not protruding above the angle. Mr. Wilson agrees with staff they comply with the criteria and asked if there were any questions. Mr. Goode asked if there were any questions for the applicant. Mr. Goode asked if it is a demo and complete rebuild. Mr. Wilson replied it was difficult to rebuild the slope without raising the entire house. The house was just in the way. Ms. Nadolny added the former approval in 2013 triggered the technical definition of demolition. Mr. Goode then opened for public comment. Mr. Chris Lane, Chief Executive Officer of the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies (ACES), apologized for being late to the game. From their standpoint, they are seeing this for the first time. He continued stating there is a lot of big development around Hallam Lake and it has a big impact on ACES. ACES is a nature preserve and is more sensitive than the usual neighbor. He stated in an ideal world it would be nice to not have the impact of construction and it is nice it will be moving out of the setback from the bluff. He asked if the timing and duration of construction, duration of demolition and noise constraints have been determined. He asked if anything could be adjusted in regards to the needs of ACES. Ms. Phelan stated the City has noise ordinances and complaints will be followed up on. There are also construction standards for the timing of construction defining what hours during the week construction is permitted. There are standards of when construction can occur. The City also requires a construction management plan which defines where and how construction occurs, where materials are stored. Mr. Lane stated they teach birding classes in the morning so hammering at 7 AM is problematic for ACES. Ms. Quinn suggested a meeting with the applicant to work through these issues because they do not seem to be related to what P&Z’s purview at this meeting. Mr. Goode stated he understands his concerns but it is not part of their parameters to approve this application. He reiterated ACES should approach the applicant. Mr. Lane then asked if trees on the property will be removed. Ms. Phelan stated the Parks Department manages any removal of trees. Mr. Wilson stated they are not suggesting to cut down any trees on the bluff side. The original approval required they keep all the trees. Mr. Lane asked where they are sourcing the revegetation. Mr. Wilson stated it will be sourced from the bluff, grown offsite and transplanted back. Mr. Lane then asked how he could get more information about the phasing of the construction. Mr. Wilson stated they are working with the contractor to establish schedules and he will be happy to keep them included as part of the process. Mr. Goode then asked if the commissioners had questions or discussion. Ms. McNicholas Kury motioned to approve resolution #22, series 2015. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mesirow. Mr. Goode requested a roll call. Roll call vote: Mr. McNight, yes; Ms. McNicholas Kury, yes; Mr. Mesirow, yes; Mr. McNellis, yes; and Mr. Goode, yes. The motion passed with a total five (5) yes – zero (0) no. P3 IV.A. Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 4 Mr. Goode then closed the public hearing. Mr. Goode then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager P4 IV.A. Page 1 of 6 MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Hillary Seminick, Planner THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director RE: Lot 2 Erdman Partnership Lot Split – RDS Variance Request MEETING DATE: January 5, 2016 APPLICANT/OWNERS: Bell 26 LLC PO Box 1860 Bentonville AR 72712 REPRESENTATIVE: Steev Wilson Forum Phi Architecture 715 W. Main St. Suite 204 Aspen CO 81611 LOCATION: Lot 2, Erdman Partnership Lot Split CURRENT ZONING & USE: Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district; vacant lot PROPOSED LAND USE: Single-family residence SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting two Residential Design Standard variances that will allow for a new single family residence to not meet secondary mass requirement or inflection. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the applicants’ request for a residential design standard variance to permit for a new single family residence without meeting the secondary mass or inflection. Figure A: Image of subject property, Lot 2 is in the foreground P5 VI.A. Page 2 of 6 LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval: Variance from the Residential Design Standard pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020.B Building Form, Secondary Mass which states: All new single-family and duplex structures shall locate at least ten percent (10%) of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate linking element. This standard shall only apply to parcels within the Aspen infill area pursuant to Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. A subordinate linking element for the purposes of linking a primary and secondary mass shall be at least ten (10) feet in length, not more than ten (10) feet in width, and with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Accessible outdoor space over the linking element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an accessible outdoor space over a linking element must be the minimum reasonably necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must be 50% or more transparent. Variance from the Residential Design Standard pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020.E(a) Context, Inflection which states: If a one-story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one-story in height along their common lot line. If there are one-story buildings on both sides of the subject site, the applicant may choose the side toward which to inflect. A one-story building shall be defined as follows: A one story building shall mean a structure or portion of a structure, where there is only one (1) floor of fully usable living space, at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage. This standard shall be met by providing a one story element which is also at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage and one (1) story tall as far back along the common lot line as the adjacent building is one (1) story. No additional land use reviews are requested in the application. Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority for the request. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND: The subject property is located in the Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district. This property is located within of the Aspen Infill Area in the West End neighborhood. Lot 2 is situated on Lake Avenue, a public street. Lot 2 is vacant and has not been previously developed. The Erdman Partnership Lot Split was approved in Ordinance No. 66, Series of 1990. Condition 5 of the approval provided maximum floor area and site coverage for both lots. Lot 2 has an approved floor area of 3,449 sq. ft. and 30.34% (2,700 sq. ft.) maximum site coverage. Lot 1 of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split is to the east of Lot 2. Egress to both lots is provided through Lot 2 by a 20’ vehicular access easement, approx. P6 VI.A. Page 3 of 6 PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant requests a variance from Secondary Mass and Inflection as shown in Figures C and D for a new single family residence on a vacant lot. Drawings have been provided by the applicant and provided in Exhibit C. STAFF COMMENTS: The purpose of the Secondary Mass Standard is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes which are more similar in their massing, by promoting the development of accessory buildings off of the City alleys and by preserving solar access. The intent of the Inflection Standard is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and more specifically, neighborhood characteristics, when designing new structures. With intent of these standards in mind, Staff has reviewed the request against the RDS variance review criteria for each standard. The Code states that each request for RDS variance must meet one of the following criteria. a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Secondary Mass A variance from the Secondary standard would permit a structure where 10% of the above grade total square footage not be detached or linked to the principal building by a subordinate linking element. The Applicant response to the review criteria in Exhibit B states that the structure on Lot 2, referred to as a “carriage house” is the Secondary Mass to the “main house” located on Lot 1. The structure on Lot 2 does not meet the definition of carriage house. Carriage houses do not count as a Figure B: Site Location Map, indicated by highlighted parcel P7 VI.A. Page 4 of 6 unit of density, are deed restricted, subordinate to the primary structure and have 800-1,200 sq. ft. of net livable floor area. The proposed 3,442 sq. ft. structure is the single and primary structure on the Lot 2. The proposed structure on Lot 2, a separate lot from Lot 1, does not serve as the Secondary Mass for the primary structure on Lot 1. Each Lot should function independently of the other and meet the requirements of the Code. No site specific constraints such as steep slopes or pre-existing construction are present. The Residential Design Standards were created to preserve established neighborhood character and scale. A variance from the Standard would not protect the neighborhood character of the West End. Staff finds the variance request for Secondary Mass does not meet the neighborhood standard. There are no site-specific constraints associated with this parcel that warrant the granting of this variance from Secondary Mass. Staff finds that criterion 26.410.020.D.2 (a) and (b) are not met. Inflection The subject property is adjacent to a one story structure. One of the goals of Residential Design Standards is to protect the unique character of Aspen, which is met by avoiding a significant overshadowing of small homes by larger structures. The Inflection standard requires a structure reduce its mass along the shared lot line if it is adjacent to a one story structure. The standard may be met if a one story element is provided along the shared lot line for the length of the adjacent structure and a minimum of 12’ along the front lot line. A photo of the neighboring structure at 340 Lake Ave. is provided in Figure E. The cabin is estimated to be 20’ in depth. Therefore, to meet inflection, the new structure on Lot 2 should have an element that is one story in height for 12’ along the front lot line and approx. 20’ along the shared lot line, matching the length of the structure on the adjacent lot. The proposed structure does not inflect towards the structure to the south and therefore does not meet the Inflection Standard. Figure C: West elevation, facing Lake Avenue P8 VI.A. Page 5 of 6 Staff finds the variance request does not meet the neighborhood standard. There are no site-specific constraints associated with this parcel that warrant the granting of this variance for inflection. Staff finds that criterion 26.410.020.D.2 (a) and (b) are not met. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the request for a Residential Design Standard variances from Secondary Mass and Inflection. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): The following motion may be used: “I move to approve the request for a variance from the Residential Design Standard as noted in Resolution ___, Series of 2016.” The board may choose to approve or deny the motion. Figure D: Excerpt from A-204, View from Street Figure E: 340 Lake Avenue, one story structure to the south P9 VI.A. Page 6 of 6 Attachments: Exhibit A – Residential Design Standard Variance Criteria Exhibit B – Application Exhibit C – Application Graphics Exhibit D – Public Notice P10 VI.A. 1 RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2016) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOT 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. Parcel ID: 2735-121-32-002 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Bell 26, LLC (Applicants), represented by Forum Phi Architects, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve Residential Design Standard Variances at Lot 2 of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.410.020.D of the Land Use Code approval for a Residential Design Standard Variance may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable review standards; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the request for two Residential Design Standard Variances that will permit a variance from the Secondary Mass and Inflection Standards, and as depicted in Exhibit 1. Planning and Zoning Commission have found the proposed design to meet the requirements of the review criteria for a Residential Design Standard variance. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. P11 VI.A. 2 Section 3: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 5th day of January, 2016. __________________________________ Keith Goode, Vice Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: _________________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Exhibit 1: Approved plans for RDS variance (recorded) P12 VI.A. PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 G-001 COVER 12/31/15 TBD TBD 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 | LOT 2 | RDS VARIANCE NOTE | Lot 1 of 360 Lake Avenue, as shown in these drawings, is currently scheduled to be reviewed by P&Z for Hallam Lake Bluff Review on December 15th. P 1 3 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-101 PROPOSED SITE PLAN 12/31/15 TBD TBD 7870 7870 7 8 6 5 7 8 6 0 7 8 5 5 7 8 5 0 7 8 4 5 7 8 4 02 0 '-0 " 1 0 '-0 " 30'-0" 20'-0"15'-0"15'-0" 1 5 '-0 " 2 0 '-0 " 6'-5" 33'-91/2"4 A-202 1 A-201 3 A-202 A A-203 A A-203 2 A-201 EXISTING 6' FENCE TO REMAIN NEW CITY DRAINAGE PIPE PROPERTY LINE LINE OF EXTERIOR WALL FRONT PORCH 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 20' FRONT YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 20' WIDE ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT (PER FINAL PLAT) 30' REAR YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) LOT 2 CARRIAGE HOUSE 20' SIDE YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 15' FRONT YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 15' UTILITY EASEMENT & SIDE YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) LAKE AVE PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE LOT 1 MAIN HOUSE 15' FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) PROPOSED SITE PLAN 1" = 20' P 1 4 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-201 ELEVATIONS 12/31/15 TBD TBD S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T S 1 & 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 CARRIAGE HOUSEMAIN HOUSE LAKE AVE S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 20' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT 25'-41/2" 8 '- 5 " FRONT DOOR PRINCIPLE WINDOWS FRONT PORCH UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-9" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 109'-0" NO WINDOW ZONE 112'-0" 2 NORTH ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" 1 WEST ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" P 1 5 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-202 ELEVATIONS 12/31/15 TBD TBD S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 20' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT CARRIAGE HOUSE MAIN HOUSE LAKE AVE P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T S 1 & 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 40'-101/2" 8 '-5 " 3 EAST ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" 4 SOUTH ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" P 1 6 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-203 SECTIONS 12/31/15 TBD TBD P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T S 1 & 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 CARRIAGE HOUSE MAIN HOUSE S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 20' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT 30'-0" A SECTION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" B SECTION - LOT 1 1/16" = 1'-0" P 1 7 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-204 VIEW FROM STREET 12/31/15 TBD TBD MAIN HOUSECARRIAGE HOUSE CARRIAGE HOUSE MAIN HOUSE LAKE AVE LAKE AVE P 1 8 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-205 VIEW FROM SOUTH 12/31/15 TBD TBD MAIN HOUSECARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE MAIN HOUSECARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE P 1 9 V I . A . 26.410.020.D. Variances. 2. Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet this Section may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the requirements of Chapter 26.415. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use review by the Historic preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall find that variance, if granted, woul a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b). Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness r constraints. 26.410.040. Residential Design Standards. B. Building form. The intent of the following building form standards is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes which are more similar i massing, by promoting the development of accessory units off of the City alleys and by preserving solar access. 1. Secondary mass. All new single duplex structures shall locate at least ten percent (10%) of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate linking element. This standard shall only apply to parcels within the Aspen infill area pursuant to Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. Accessory buildi garages, sheds and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. A subordinate linking element shall be at least ten (10) feet in length, not more than plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Accessible outdoor space over the linking element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an accessible outdoor space over a linking e Exhibit B – Residential Design Standard Variances Lot 2 Erdman Partnership Lot Split Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet this Section may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the requirements of Chapter 26.415. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use review by the Historic preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the variance application decided by the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall find that variance, if granted, would: Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site 26.410.040. Residential Design Standards. The intent of the following building form standards is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes which are more similar i massing, by promoting the development of accessory units off of the City alleys and by All new single-family and duplex structures shall locate at least ten percent (10%) of their total square footage bove grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate linking element. This standard shall only apply to parcels within the Aspen infill area pursuant to Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the subordinate linking element for the purposes of linking a primary and secondary mass shall be at least ten (10) feet in length, not more than ten (10) feet in width, and with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Accessible outdoor space over the linking element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an accessible outdoor space over a linking element must be the minimum reasonably Residential Design Standard Variances Lot 2 Erdman Partnership Lot Split Page 1 of 2 Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet this Section may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of project is subject to the requirements of Chapter 26.415. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use review by the Historic preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the variance application decided by the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to elated to unusual site-specific The intent of the following building form standards is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes which are more similar in their massing, by promoting the development of accessory units off of the City alleys and by for the purposes of linking a primary and secondary mass ten (10) feet in width, and with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Accessible outdoor space over the linking element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an lement must be the minimum reasonably P20 VI.A. necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must be 50% or more transparent. Staff Finding: The Applicant requests a variance from the Secondary Mass Residential Desig of the Erdman Partnership is a vacant, flat lot in the West End; established Series 1990. The Standard is intended to break up the mass on the site and relates to the pattern of development in the West End. in a unique site constraint to warrant a variance. context with the neighborhood for this Standard. There are warrant the granting of this variance Standard. E. Context. The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures. 2. Inflection. The following standard must b (6,000) square feet or over and as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.2: a) If a one-story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one their common lot line. If there are one buildings on both sides of the subject site, the applicant may choose the side toward which to inflect. A one-story building shall be defined as follows: A story building shall mean a structure or portion of a structure, where there is only one (1) floor of fully usable living space, at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage. This standard shall be met by providing a one-story element which is also at leas wide across the street frontage and one (1) story tall as far back along the common lot line as the adjacent building is one (1) story. Staff Finding: The proposed structure inflection. Staff finds that there is no site specific constraint or neighborhood p support this variance. Staff finds that neither criterion is met for this Standard. Exhibit B – Residential Design Standard Variances Lot 2 Erdman Partnership Lot Split necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must be 50% or more transparent. Applicant requests a variance from the Secondary Mass Residential Design Partnership is a vacant, flat lot in the West End; established by Ordinance No. The Standard is intended to break up the mass on the site and relates to the pattern of development in the West End. There are no manmade nor environmental challenges resulting in a unique site constraint to warrant a variance. Staff finds the variance request is not in standard, and finds the criterion 26.410.020.D.2.a no site-specific constraints associated with this parcel that warrant the granting of this variance. Staff finds criterion 26.410.020.D.2.b is not The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures. on. The following standard must be met for parcels which are six thousand (6,000) square feet or over and as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.2: story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one-story in height along their common lot line. If there are one-story buildings on both sides of the subject site, the applicant may choose the side toward which to story building shall be defined as follows: A one- shall mean a structure or portion of a structure, where there is only one (1) floor of fully usable living space, at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage. This standard shall be met by providing a story element which is also at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage and one (1) story tall as far back along the common lot line as the adjacent proposed structure is adjacent to a one story residence and Staff finds that there is no site specific constraint or neighborhood p finds that neither criterion 26.410.020.D.2.a or is 26.410.020.D.2.b If… Residential Design Standard Variances Lot 2 Erdman Partnership Lot Split Page 2 of 2 necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must n Standard. Lot 2 Ordinance No. 66, The Standard is intended to break up the mass on the site and relates to the pattern manmade nor environmental challenges resulting variance request is not in 26.410.020.D.2.a is not met specific constraints associated with this parcel that is not met for this The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood e met for parcels which are six thousand (6,000) square feet or over and as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.2: acent to a one story residence and does not provide Staff finds that there is no site specific constraint or neighborhood pattern to 26.410.020.D.2.b Then P21 VI.A. ASLU RDS Variance 350 Lake Ave. 273512132002 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Justin Barker, 970.429.2797 DATE: 9.28.15 PROJECT: Lot 2, Erdman Partnership Lot Split (350 Lake Ave) REPRESENTATIVE: Kara Thompson, 970.615.0878 REQUEST: RDS Variance DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Residential Design Standard Variance related to secondary mass on this site. The applicant is proposing construction of a new home on the property which is currently a vacant lot located on Lake Avenue, and is Lot 2 of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split. The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 26.410.040.B.1, Secondary Mass. The standard requires that all new single-family and duplex structures locate at least 10% of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate linking element. Staff will accept an application for administrative review. The following two criteria are used in determining the appropriateness of a variance: a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. If staff cannot support administrative approval, application can be made to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use App: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/2013%20land%20use%20app%20form.pdf Below is Land Use Code: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26-Land-Use-Code/ Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.410.020.D.1 RDS variances Review by: Staff for complete application and administrative determination Public Hearing: None, unless P&Z review is deemed necessary Planning Fees: Planning Deposit – RDS variance ($650 flat fee) Referral Fees: None Total Deposit: $650 (additional planning hours over deposit amount are billed at a rate of $325/hour) To apply, submit the following information: P22 VI.A. 2 ¨ 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 (Attached) ¨ A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property. ¨ A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of Colorado. ¨ Written responses to all review criteria. ¨ An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. ¨ 1 Complete Copy. If the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted: ¨ 1 additional copy of the complete application packet and, if applicable, associated drawings. ¨ Total deposit for review of the application. ¨ A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format. 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. P23 VI.A. P24 VI.A. P25 VI.A. P26 VI.A. Customer Distribution Our Order Number: QPR62006813 Date: 07-01-2015 Property Address: 360 LAKE AVENUE, ASPEN, CO 81611 For Title Assistance KIM SHULTZ 533 E HOPKINS #102 ASPEN, CO 81611 970-927-0405 (phone) 970-925-6243 (fax) kshultz@ltgc.com Lender - New Loan FORUM PHI Attention: WILLIAM LEWIS 715 W MAIN ST #204 ASPEN, CO 81611 970-319-7399 (work) wlewis@forumphi.com,kthompson@fourmphi.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail P27 VI.A. Land Title Guarantee Company Property Report Order Number: 62006813 This Report is based on a limited search of the county real property records and provides the name(s) of the vested owner(s), the legal description, tax information (taken from information provided by the county treasurer on its website) and encumbrances, which, for the purposes of this report, means deed of trust and mortgages, and liens recorded against the property and the owner(s) in the records of the clerk and recorder for the county in which the subject is located. This Report does not constitute any form of warranty or guarantee of title or title insurance. The liability of Land Title Guarantee Company is strictly limited to (1) the recipient of the Report, and no other person, and (2) the amount paid for the report. Prepared For: FORUM PHI This Report is dated: 06-26-2015 at 5:00 P.M. Address: 360 LAKE AVENUE, ASPEN, CO 81611 Legal Description: LOT 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. Record Owner: BELL 26 LLC We find the following documents of record affecting subject property: 1. GENERAL WARRANTY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 25, 2000 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 440884. ***************** PROPERTY TAX INFORMATION ********************** PARCEL NO.: 273512132002 2015 LAND ASSESSED VALUE $1,113,600.00 2015 IMPROVEMENTS ASSESSED VALUE $0.00 2014 REAL PROPERTY TAXES PAID IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,352.36. **************************************************************** P28 VI.A. ATTACHMENT 2 –LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Name: Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) APPLICANT: Name: Address: Phone #: REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: GMQS Exemption Conceptual PUD Temporary Use GMQS Allotment Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Text/Map Amendment Special Review Subdivision Conceptual SPA ESA – 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane Subdivision Exemption (includes condominiumization) Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) Commercial Design Review Lot Split Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion Residential Design Variance Lot Line Adjustment Other: Conditional Use EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $_________ Pre-Application Conference Summary Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5” X 11” must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. P29 VI.A. ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: Applicant: Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________ Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________ Number of bedrooms: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________ Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only):__________ DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Principal bldg. height: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Access. bldg. height: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined F/R: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Distance Between Buildings Existing ________Required:__________Proposed:_____ Existing non-conformities or encroachments:___________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ Variations requested: ______________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ P30 VI.A. 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, theCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentrecommendedinfavoroftheproposedamendment; 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 undertherecommendationoftheCommunityDevelopmentDirector, 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 3P31 VI.A. 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 anyactionorproceedingnowpendingunderorbyvirtueoftheordinancesrepealedoramendedas 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 3P32 VI.A. 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 3P33 VI.A. P34 VI.A. P35 VI.A. P36 VI.A. P37 VI.A. P38 VI.A. P39 VI.A. P40 VI.A. P41 VI.A. P42 VI.A. P43 VI.A. P44 VI.A. P45 VI.A. P46 VI.A. P47 VI.A.       Vicinity Map – 360 Lake Ave P48 VI.A. RDS Administrative Variance Re quest November 23, 2015 Bell 26, LLC [the “Applicant”] submits this request for a variance to the Secondary Mass requirement at Lot 2 of 360 Lake Avenue (the “Property”). The subject site is a 8,899 SF parcel located in the within the Residential (R-6) zone district of the West End and is currently undeveloped. This property is part of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split. There is a 20’ wide access and utility easement on the South side of the property that provides access to Lot 1 of the Lot Split. 26.410.020.D.1 RDS Variances Administrative variances. The applicant may seek an administrative variance for not more than three (3) of the individual requirements. An applicant who desires a variance from the residential design standards shall demonstrate, and the Community Development Director shall find that the variances, if granted, would: a Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Request for Administrative Varience From: 26.410.040,B,1. Secondary Mass P49 VI.A. 2 Project Overview Lots 1 & 2 of the Erdman Partnership Lot Split at 360 Lake Ave were subdivided in 1990, creating two separate lots. As seen in the survey, Lot 2 of the lot split is adjacent to Lake Ave., and has a 20’ wide easement along its south edge to provide access to Lot 1, whose East side borders Hallam Lake. The proposed design reflects a thoughtful and logical connection between the properties where Lot 1 contains the “Main House” overlooking the lake, and Lot 2 contains the “Carriage House” adjacent to the street. The Carriage House on Lot 2, the smaller of the lots, lends itself naturally to a secondary element to the primary structure, which takes advantage of the Hallam Lake views from Lot 1. This relationship of Main House to Carrage House is reflected in their massing, overall character, and location on the site. It seems that the massing relationship of primary mass and secondary mass would be implicit to the subdivision of the two newly created lots as they necessitate the creation of two detached structures on what used to be a single parcel. In addition to this overarching massing relationship, the garage structure of Lot 1 serves as a tertiary mass balanced between the two lots, simultaneously connecting the two structures as perceived from the street, while providing a break in cadence between them, as is the intent of the code to break up the mass. Basis for Request: • The parcel has a non-standard orientation as a result of it being a subdivided historic lot whose dimensions are atypical with the long block length along the only street face and no alley to relate to as noted in the standard. • The intent, …to respect the scale of Aspen’s historic homes by creating new homes that are more similar in their massing by promoting the development of accessory units off of the City alleys and by preserving solar access, is met by the predominantly single story home, with the second story being concealed within the eaves and dormers. Since this parcel has no alley to relate to, the overall reduced height and mass preserves solar access to the lot behind as the intent requires. • The structure is divided into two equal and distinct masses which are separated by more than 25’, connected by roof which has a single story plate height of 10’. • The plate height of this structure along the entire street facing façade is a single story height at 10’ or less. Back from the front facade at least 6’, the structure employees dormers to create a liviable attic space which decreases the mass and scale of the structure. The secondary mass code does not seem to take into account a continuous single story plate height rather than 2 larger masses which would seem to achieve the same intent of reducing mass. • When Lots 1 & 2 are considered collectively they achieve the intent of the code having 2 detached masses as percieved from the street. Summary: It is our sincere belief that the proposed structure provides an appropriate design and pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed. It establishes a neighborhood scale and character which contributes to the streetscape and honors the scale of Aspen’s historical homes. We feel the intent of the code is met by a structure with such a reduced mass, especially when considered in context with its fathering parcel and surrounding context of the Lake Avenue neighborhood. The proposed design meets all the other design requirements of the Residential Design Standards, and requests that Staff find that the spirit of the requirement for Secondary Mass be determinded to be met. P50 VI.A. 3 26.410.040. Residential Design Standards A. Site Design. 1. Building orientation. The proposed structure faces the street as required. 2. Build-to lines. The proposed design locates more than 60% of the structure within 5’ of the front yard setback. 3. Fences. There are no proposed fences on this property. B. Building form. 1. Secondary mass. As seen in the survey, Lot 2 of the lot split is adjacent to Lake Ave., and has a 20’ wide easement along its south edge to provide access to Lot 1, whose East side borders Hallam Lake. The proposed design reflects a thoughtful and logical connection between the properties where Lot 1 contains the “Main House” overlooking the lake, and Lot 2 contains the “Carriage House” adjacent to the street. The Carriage House on Lot 2, the smaller of the lots, lends itself naturally to a secondary element to the primary structure, which takes advantage of the Hallam Lake views from Lot 1. This relationship of Main House to Carrage House is reflected in their massing, overall character, and location on the site. It seems that the massing relationship of primary mass and secondary mass would be implicit to the subdivision of the two newly created lots as they necessitate the creation of two detached structures on what used to be a single parcel. In addition to this overarching massing relationship, the garage structure of Lot 1 serves as a tertiary mass balanced between the two lots, simultaneously connecting the two structures as perceived from the street, while providing a break in cadence between them, as is the intent of the code to break up the mass. C. Parking, garages and carports. 1. For all residential uses that have access from an alley or private road, the [listed] standards shall apply: The proposed garage doors are single stall doors and are visible and accessed from the alley. 2. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the [listed] standards shall apply: The proposed garage doors are single stall doors and are visible and accessed from the alley. D. Building elements. 1. Street oriented entrance and principle window. The proposed design has a street oriented entrance and principle window. a) The proposed entry door is no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building and is not taller than eight (8) feet. P51 VI.A. 4 b) The proposed front porch is greater than 50 square feet with a minimum depth of six feet. The entry porch is one story in height. c) The street-facing facade contains significant groups of windows. 2. First story element. The proposed design 2 proches on the street facing façade meeting the definitions of a first story element [at least 20% of the buildings overall width, 6’ in depth and 10’ in height as measured to the plate height]. 3. Windows. a) The proposed street-facing windows do not span between nine and twelve feet above the finished floor. b) There are no non-orthogonal windows proposed. 4. Lightwells. The proposed lightwells are recessed behind the front-most wall of the building and are not located on the street-facing facade. E. Context. 1. Materials. a) The quality of the proposed exterior materials and their application is consistent on all sides of the building. b) The use of materials are true to their characteristics. The building is predominantly finished in stone, with dormer elements that have wood siding. c) There are no proposed highly reflective materials. 2. Inflection. There is a 1 story cabin structure, shown in the survey, adjacent to this property to which we are inflecting. The South elevation of the proposed design is 1 story in height, with a plate height of 8’-4”. P52 VI.A. PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 11/30/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 G-001 COVER 11/30/15 TBD TBD 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 | LOT 2 | RDS VARIANCE NOTE | Lot 1 of 360 Lake Avenue, as shown in these drawings, is currently scheduled to be reviewed by P&Z for Hallam Lake Bluff Review on December 15th. P 5 3 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 11/30/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 G-002 SURVEY 11/30/15 TBD TBD P 5 4 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/11/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-101 PROPOSED SITE PLAN 12/11/15 TBD TBD 7870 7870 7 8 6 5 7 8 6 0 7 8 5 5 7 8 5 0 7 8 4 5 7 8 4 02 0 '-0 " 1 0 '-0 " 30'-0" 20'-0" 15'-0" 15'-0" 1 5 '-0 " 2 0 '-0 " 6'-5" 4 A-202 1 A-201 3 A-202 A A-203 A A-203 2 A-201 EXISTING 6' FENCE TO REMAIN NEW CITY DRAINAGE PIPE PROPERTY LINE LINE OF EXTERIOR WALL FRONT PORCH 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 20' FRONT YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 20' WIDE ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT (PER FINAL PLAT) 30' REAR YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) LOT 2 CARRIAGE HOUSE 20' SIDE YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 15' FRONT YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) 15' UTILITY EASEMENT & SIDE YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) LAKE AVE PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE LOT 1 MAIN HOUSE 15' FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK (PER FINAL PLAT) PROPOSED SITE PLAN 1" = 20' P 5 5 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-201 ELEVATIONS 12/31/15 TBD TBD S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T S 1 & 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 CARRIAGE HOUSEMAIN HOUSE LAKE AVE S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 20' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT 25'-41/2" 8 '- 5 " FRONT DOOR PRINCIPLE WINDOWS FRONT PORCH UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-9" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 109'-0" NO WINDOW ZONE 112'-0" 2 NORTH ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" 1 WEST ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" P 5 6 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-202 ELEVATIONS 12/31/15 TBD TBD S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 20' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT CARRIAGE HOUSE MAIN HOUSE LAKE AVE P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T S 1 & 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 40'-101/2" 8 '-5 " 3 EAST ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" 4 SOUTH ELEVATION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" P 5 7 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 12/31/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-203 SECTIONS 12/31/15 TBD TBD P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T S 1 & 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 1 CARRIAGE HOUSE MAIN HOUSE S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 1 S E T B A C K L I N E L O T 2 P R O P E R T Y L I N E L O T 2 20' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT 30'-0" A SECTION - LOTS 1 & 2 1/16" = 1'-0" B SECTION - LOT 1 1/16" = 1'-0" P 5 8 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 11/30/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-204 VIEW FROM STREET 11/30/15 TBD TBD MAIN HOUSECARRIAGE HOUSE CARRIAGE HOUSE MAIN HOUSE LAKE AVE LAKE AVE P 5 9 V I . A . PROJECT NO:1511 DRAWN BY:KPT COPYRIGHT FORUM PHI LLC CONTRACTOR STRUCTURAL 715 W Main St, Ste 204 Aspen, CO 81611 P: (970) 279-4157 F: (866) 770-5585 11/30/15 RDS VARIANCE DATE OF PUBLICATION 360 LAKE AVE LOT 2 360 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81611 A-205 VIEW FROM SOUTH 11/30/15 TBD TBD MAIN HOUSECARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE MAIN HOUSECARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE P 6 0 V I . A . P 6 1 V I . A . P 6 2 V I . A . City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 p: (970) 920.5000 f: (970) 920.5197 w: www.aspenpitkin.com NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: RDS Variance at Lot 2, Erdman Partnership Lot Split Public Hearing: Planning and Zoning Commission, January 5th, 2016 Meeting Location: City Hall, 130 S. Galena St, Sister Cities Conference Room Project Name: RDS Variance at Lot 2, Erdman Partnership Lot Split Project Location: PID #273512132002, legally described as Lot 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. Description: The applicant is requesting variances to the Residential Design Standards for a new single family home. Land Use Reviews: Residential Design Standard Variance Decision Making Body: Planning and Zoning Commission Applicant: Bell 26, LLC. PO Box 1860 Bentonville, AR 72712 More Information: For further information related to the project, contact Hillary Seminick at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2741, Hillary.Seminick@cityofaspen.com. P63 VI.A. Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273512132001 on 12/21/2015 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com P64 VI.A. HALLAM SANCTUARY LLC PRAIRIE VILLAGE, KS 662081140 5805 MISSION DR BASECAMP LLC KANSAS CITY, MO 64111 4049 PENNSYLVANIA AVE #400 AML INVESTMENT II LLC HENDERSON, NV 89015 430 PARKSON RD WOOD DUCK REALTY CORP NEW YORK, NY 10022 450 PARK AVE 3RD FL NORTH THIRD STREET LLC WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 500 YGNACIO VALLEY RD #360 LUBAR SHELDON B & MARIANNE S MILWAUKEE, WI 53202-4206 700 N WATER ST #1200 E A ALTEMUS PARTNERSHIP LLLP ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 5000 MUSTANG HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 715 W MAIN ST #201 BART QUAL PER RES TRST NEW ORLEANS, LA 70112 909 POYDRAS ST 20TH FL FAUQUET LLC NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 1033 SKOKIE BLVD #605 320 LAKE LLC NEW YORK, NY 10028 151 E 85TH ST #C 300 LAKE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 0133 PROSPECTOR RD #4102B CAD ASPEN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 710 N 3RD ST GILLESPIE LLC CHICAGO, IL 60606 191 N WACKER DR #1800 OAK LODGE LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 7951 HUNT ELLEN B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8770 EFH HOLDINGS LP ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8770 ASPEN CTR FOR ENVIRON STUDIES ASPEN, CO 81611 100 PUPPY SMITH ST 335 LAKE AVE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 715 W MAIN ST #101 LAKE AVENUE LAND LLC SAN DIEGO, CA 92130 3580 CARMEL MTN RD #460 MARTIN CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA BERGER BRUCE C QPRT #2 ASPEN, CO 81611 600 E HOPKINS AVE #202 BERGER BARBARA QPRT #2 ASPEN, CO 81611 600 E HOPKINS AVE #202 BERGER BRUCE C QPRT #1 ASPEN, CO 81611 600 E HOPKINS AVE #202 BERGER BARBARA QPRT #1 ASPEN, CO 81611 600 E HOPKINS AVE #202 BELL 26 LLC BENTONVILLE, AR 72712 PO BOX 1860 RIVERSIDE AVENUE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 410 LAKE AVE P65 VI.A. P66 VI.A. TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: Election of Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson MEETING DATE: January 5, 2016 At the first meeting of the year, the Planning and Zoning Commission is tasked with electing a Chair and Vice-Chair. The appointment is for one year and currently elected members can be re- elected. RECOMMENDED MOTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission may use this motion “I move to make a recommendation to elect ____________, as chairperson and _______________as vice-chairperson of the Planning and Zoning Commission for 2016.” P67 VII.A. RESOLUTION NO. __ Series of 2016 WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission is required to elect a chairperson and vice- chairperson as outlined in Section 26.212.030, Membership-Appointment, removal, terms and vacancies of the land use code; and WHEREAS, the term of each position is for one (1) year; and WHEREAS, the commission voted to elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson on January 5, 2016; and WHEREAS, _______________was elected chairperson and _______________was elected vice- chairperson; and WHEREAS, both positions shall expire on January 17, 2017; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of Aspen, Colorado, by this resolution that ____________be appointed as chairperson and ______________be appointed as vice-chairperson. DATED: January 5, 2016 _________________________ Ryan Waltersheid, Chair ATTEST:__________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager P68 VII.A.