HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile Documents.196 Pfister Dr.0107-2023-BRES (9) JOSS ARCHITECTURE+ PLANNING
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(t) 970/925-4755 (f) 970/920-2950 MEMORANDUM
TO: Robert Gregor, Utilites Permit Coordinator VIA E-MAIL 22238.00
and Kyla Smits, Engineering Proj. Mgr. 2 Pages Including Cover
CC: Chris Doody(GFS), Celia Liu(CGA), Bob Campbell and Dean Arneson (SHC), Dave Carpenter(CS), Les
Rosenstein and Jonathan Nassar(Poss), Sydney Fallon and Denis Murray(Building)
FROM: Richard L. de Campo
Bill Poss and Associates Architecture and Planning, P.C.
DATE: September 8, 2023
RE: Request to Reduce Existing Water Feature at 196 Pfister Drive ❑ ENCLOSURE
Permit#0107-2023-BRES
On behalf of the Owner, we are hereby requesting approval relative to Permit #0107-2023-BRES to
memorialize a reduction in an existing water feature at 196 Pfister Drive.
The existing water feature proposed to be altered consists of an at-grade (patio level) basin of 157 sq. ft.
with a raised `water table'weir as shown in the photo on Sheet A-501. This basin and water table is one of
a number of water features that span from the property at 196 Pfister Drive (Lot 28, Maroon Creek
Subdivision)to 190 Pfister Drive (Lot 29).
Per current Aspen Municipal Code, Chapter 25.08.090(c)states:"No outdoor water features will be allowed
on Aspen Water utility accounts effective January 1, 2022. A water feature is defined as a design element
in which open water serves primarily an aesthetic or decorative beneficial use. Water features include, but
are not limited to: ponds, lakes, waterfalls, jets, fountains, artificial streams, water stairs, infinity pools, or
cascades wherein potable water is artificially supplied to create or operate the feature. Water features do
not include swimming pools or hot tubs." Neither this paragraph nor other language in the Municipal Code
appears to address repairs, alterations or reductions of existing water features that have been approved
and installed as part of previous building permits, with designated ECUs on existing water accounts.
Also, it does not seem that Aspen's Water Efficient Landscape Standards (WELS) are relevant to this
permit, as per WELS Section 1.1 Objective: These standards are "... for new development and significant
remodels." (Neither or which apply.) Furthermore, per WELS Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2, the specific
applicability criteria listed do not apply:
The City of Aspen Water Efficient Landscaping Standards shall apply to the following projects that use
City of Aspen potable water, as well as to Aspen raw water accounts utilizing City-owned water rights.
WELS Section 2.1.1- Landscaping, grading, installing or disturbing hardscapes, additions to
structures, etc. that has a disturbance area greater than 1,000 square feet and greater than 25%
of the entire site.
WELS Section 2.1.2- All building permits that trigger a "substantial remodel" per Title 25 of the
Municipal Code, defined as the increase by fifty percent (50%) or more in the water using
capacity of new water using devices or fixtures installed on a property, as measured by the ECU
rating of the existing and proposed structure(s).
Therefore, requesting a variance to standards that don't apply doesn't make logical sense.
JOSS ARCHITECTURE+ PLANNING
As previously commented on the SalesForce Permit Portal for this project:
1) "However, since we are basically walling off one end of an existing water feature of 157 sf and using
only a 2'wide section (11sf) of the existing basin, we are eliminating 85% of an existing water feature
use, which supports the goals of Aspen's Water Efficiency Plan."
2) "Please note that the existing water features (both on 190 Pfister and 196 Pfister) have easements and
approvals recorded (reception #572299 on 10/20/2010), which "...establish perpetual, non-exclusive,
reciprocal easements to provide for the continued existence of the Mutual Amenities [incl. water
features] ... for the maintenance, repair,preservation and replacement thereof;" (italics added for
clarity.)The scope of work in this permit is delineated as Water Feature#2 in that document.
The scope of this project has negligible impact on adjacent landowners; furthermore, approval has already
been granted by MCC SARC (Maroon Creek Subdivision Special Architectural Review Committee.)
The fact that we are proposing reducing an 157 sf water feature to an 11 sf pool should be viewed favorably
to reduce water usage. The extent of the demo is shown in plan on A-102 and in both longitudinal and
cross-section on A-501.The extent of the reduced water feature within the end of the existing basin is shown
in plan on A-201 and in section on A-502. The complete demolition of the existing raised water table
(essentially an elevated weir, with water continually washing over the perimeter edges)and removing 85%
of the extent of the water basin footprint and converting it into a planter will significantly reduce the water
usage of this element— a net benefit toward the City's goal of reducing water consumption. It seems this
type of water use downsizing should be encouraged, rather than impeded.
Furthermore, this reduction of water use is entirely consistent with the purpose and intent of the Water
Efficient Landscaping Standards (WELS), even though this project scope is not within the purview of those
standards. There are existing utility connections to this water feature, so no tap fees are required.Although
noted by Kyla Smits as part of a variance process,an analysis signed by a qualified landscape professional
does not seem to be necessary as this water use reduction is pretty straightforward.
We hope you will concur with these points and will be able to sign off on approving this permit very soon.
Thank you for consideration of this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard L. de Campo, AIA Emeritus, PE Ret., CSI Ret., LEED-AP
Adjunct Principal