HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20021001 AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2002
4:30 PM
SISTER CITIES ROOM
I. COMMENTS
A. Commissioners
B. Planning Staff
C. Public
II. MINUTES
III. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
IV. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 1170 RIVER DRIVE STREAM MARGIN REVIEW, SPECIAL
REVIEW TO APPEAL TOP OF SLOPE MAP, AND
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARI.ANCE, Scott
Woodford
B. INFILL LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS, Chris Bendon,
continued from September 24th
V. BOARD REPORTS
VI. ADJOURN
JV�R
11 Pi
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU: Joyce Allgaier Ohlson, Deputy Director
FROM: Scott Woodford, Planner
RE: 1170 River Dr. Stream Margin Review, Resolution No. , Series of 2002—
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: October 1, 2002
APPLICANT
William and Joyce Gruenberg
REPRESENTATIVE
Randy Wedum of Wedum and Associates
PARCEL & LEGAL ID
#2735-013-07-002 / Lot 17 Black Birch Subdivision
ADDRESS
1170 River Dr. Aspen, Co
ZONING
R-3 0
CURRENT LAND USE
Single Family Residential
PROPOSED LAND USE
Single Family Residential
REQUESTED ACTION
Stream Margin Review and Appeal of the Stream Margin Map's top of slope determination
and a variance to the Residential Design Standards for two non -orthogonal windows.
SUMMARY
The property is located in an Environmentally Sensitive Area along the Roaring Fork River,
therefore is subject to the special review procedures of the Stream Margin Review. The
applicant is proposing a 2,060 square foot addition to an existing single-family dwelling,
which consists of a two car garage, laundry room, mud room, shop, new entry, and a later
FIX
remodel and addition to the master bedroom, bunk room, bathrooms on the second floor of
the existing house.
The existing house is located partially in the 100-year floodplain, although the entire
addition will be sited to be completely outside of the 100-year floodplain. The Stream
Margin Map indicates that the house and addition are within the designated top of slope
boundary, so the applicant is requesting a variance to the designated top of slope boundary.
The applicant is also requesting a variance to add two non -orthogonal windows to the front
fagade where only one is allowed.
STAFF COMMENTS
Development located within one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally, from the high
water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or within the one -hundred -year
floodplain where it extends one hundred (100) feet from the high water line of the Roaring
Fork River and its tributary streams, or within a flood hazard area are subject to heightened
review so as to reduce and prevent property loss by flood while ensuring the natural and
unimpeded flow of watercourses. Review shall encourage development and land uses that
preserve and protect existing watercourses as important natural features.
26. 435.040 C Stream Margin Review Standards states:
No development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the Roaring Fork River,
unless the Community Development Director makes a determination that the proposed
development complies with all requirements set forth below (NOTE: Since the application
does not comply with criteria 98 and #9 below, it is being reviewed by the Planning and
Zoning Commission instead of the Coinmunity Development Director):
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development, which is in the Special Flood
Hazard Area, will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for
development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Colorado which shows that
the base flood elevation will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposing
mitigation techniques on or off -site which compensate for any base flood elevation
increase caused by the development; and
➢ Staff Finding:
Complies - Although the existing house is partially located within the 100-year
floodplain (Special Flood Hazard Area), the submitted plans show the new
addition to be located completely out of the 100-year floodplain.
2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open
Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway Plan are implemented in the
proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic
public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A
2
fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries
of the river course shall be granted via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement;" and,
➢ Staff Finding:
Complies - Per the submitted plans staff does not foresee any conflicts with goals
and objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and
Complies - The Roaring Fork River Greenway Plan recommendations are being
met and implemented to the greatest extent possible; and
According to the applicant, this site has not traditionally provided access for
fishermen. Staff inquired as to whether the applicant would be willing to
provide a fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high
water boundaries of the river course, but the applicant did not wish to do so at
this time.
3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made
outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be
designated by this review and said envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of
any demolition, excavation or building permits. The barricades shall remain in place
until the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy; and
➢ Staff Finding:
Complies - Per the submitted plans, 6 trees will be need to be relocated and 3
trees will be removed (due to roots affecting the floor in the sun room, branches
and debris falling on the solar skylight, and are in the area of expansion),
however, all are located within the specifically defined building envelope. A
Tree Removal Permit has been obtained from the City of Aspen Parks Office
granting approval for removing the trees (with a payment of $8,000 for
mitigation). Given the heavily wooded nature of the site, the removal of 3 trees
and the relocating of 6 others will not have a noticeable effect on the site.
There will not be any disturbance of vegetation outside of the building envelope.
The Code requires that the building envelope be barricaded prior to issuance of
any demolition, excavation or building permits and that it shall remain in place
until the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of
the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during
construction. Increased on -site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to
prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained
outside of the designated building envelope; and
3
WA
Staff Finding:
Complies - The proposed development will not pollute the river or interfere with
the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary including erosion
and/or sedimentation during construction. As a condition of approval, a silt
fence shall be placed along the riverside of the building envelope.
5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any
alteration or relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the
Federal Emergency Management Agency; and
Staff Finding:
Complies — As a condition of approval, the applicant will notify the Colorado
Water Conservation Board because they are proposing to relocate the Taggart
Ditch to make way for the proposed addition.
6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies
to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood
carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and
➢ Staff Finding:
Complies - Since the watercourse is proposed to be altered, a guarantee shall be
provided and applied to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished. The
details of the guarantee shall be determined prior to building permit (a condition
of approval has been added to this effect).
7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within
the one -hundred -year floodplain; and
➢ Staff Finding:
Complies - Per the submitted plans, no development is proposed within the one -
hundred -year floodplain.
8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place
below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing
riparian vegetation and bank stability; and
➢ Staff Finding:
Staff supports a variance to the location of the top of slope to accommodate this
request for the following reasons: This is an existing house located within the top
of slope and the high waterline, so there already exists a non -conforming
4
P5
structure. The addition to the house will be located outside of the high
waterline, therefore, not expanding the non -conformity. If this were a proposal
for a new house on a previously un-built lot, staff would require the home to be
built to the standards of the ordinance. According to Engineering, in this
instance, the most important factor is that the addition is located outside of the
floodplain and that it is covered under the National Flood Insurance Program.
9. All development outside the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not
exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from
ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the
Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section
26.04.100 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020; and
➢ Staff Findin6:
With the variance to the stop of slope location, the new addition (but not a
portion of the existing house) will be located outside the 15-foot setback from the
new top of slope and does not exceed the height delineated by a line drawn at a
45-degree angle from the ground level at the top of slope.
10. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or
located down the slope and shall be in compliance with section 26.575.150; and
➢ Staff Finding:
Complies — As a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan
with the Building Permit application demonstrating compliance with all exterior
lighting and design criteria.
11. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones.
Staff Finding:
Complies - A site plan has been submitted that identifies the riparian zone. The
applicant's wetlands consultant has been in contact with the Army Corps of
Engineers regarding wetland impacts and doesn't anticipate any wetlands
permits (see attached letter). As a condition of approval, the applicant shall
provide confirmation of this prior to building permit.
Variance from the Residential Design Standards
Section 26. 410.020 D. Variances. Variances fi°om the Residential Design Standards, Section
26.410.040 , may be granted by the Design Review Appeal Committee as established in
Chapter 26.222. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use reviews
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
I
.e
commission reviewing the other land use application.
The applicant requests a variance from the following Residential Design Standard
requirement:
Section 26.410.040. D. 3. b. No more than one non -orthogonal window shall be allowed on
each facade of the building. A single non -orthogonal window in a gable end may be divided
with mullions and still be considered one non -orthogonal window.
The applicant is proposing two non -orthogonal windows (see attached letter from applicant
requesting the variance). Staff supports the request, as this structure is not visible at all to the
general public. It is located at the end of a cul-de-sac and on a heavily wooded lot and this
relatively minor variance would not impact the streetscape.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Stream Margin Review and Appeal of the Stream Margin
Map's top of slope determination, finding that the criteria per Section 26.435.040 C, Stream
Margin Review Standards has been met and the variance to the Residential Design Standards
to allow two non -orthogonal windows on the south east and south west facade.
RECOMMENDED MOTION .
"I move to approve Resolution No.ot, (Series of 2002) fora Stream Margin Review and
Appeal of the Stream Margin Map's top of slope determination for a property located in an
Environmentally Sensitive Area at 1170 River Drive, Lot 17, of the Black Birch Estates
Subdivision along the Roaring Fork River and a variance to the Residential Design
Standards."
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Site Plan — Proposed
B. Site Plan — Existing Conditions
C. Floor Plans for Addition
D. Building Elevations
E. Application
F. Wetlands Letter
G. Tree Removal Permit
H. Request for Variance for Non -Orthogonal Windows
Cel
RESOLUTION NO�7SERIES OF 2002
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A STREAM MARGIN
REVIEW AND A VARIANCE TO THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1170 RIVER DRIVE;
LOT 17, BLACK BIRCH SUBDIVISION
Parcel ID: 2735-013-07-002
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from the Applicant, William and Joyce Gruenberg, represented by Randy Wedum of
Wedum Associates, requesting a Stream Margin Review approval and a variance to the
Residential Design Standards, for the residence located at 1170 River Dr. Aspen, CO; and
WHEREAS pursuant to Section 26.212, the Planning and Zoning Commission
may review and approve the Stream Margin Review Application; and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable Land Use Code
standards, the Community Development Department recommends approval for the Stream
Margin Review; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and
considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code
as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community
Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed
public hearing on October 1, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the
development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the
approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen
Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this
Resolution fiirthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare;
and.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved, by a vote of
to (_-� the Stream Margin Review; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THE 1st DAY OF
OCTOBER 2002, THAT:
Section 1
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal
Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Stream Margin Review subject
to the following conditions:
P7
No vegetation shall be removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill)
made outside of the specifically defined building envelope designated on the
approved site plan (dated July 5, 2002 and revised August 17, 2002). The building
envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or
building permits and the barricade shall remain in place until the issuance of
Certificates of Occupancy; and
2. Prior to issuance of building permit, the following shall be required:
a. A lighting plan shall be submitted with the building permit application. All
exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with no light(s) directed
toward the river or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with
section 26.575.150.
b. A drainage plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review prior to construction. The proposed development shall not pollute
or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary
including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction and a silt fence
shall be placed along the riverside of the building envelope.
c. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Building
Department as required.
d. The applicant shall pay a Park Dedication Impact Fee for any additional
bedrooms that are added.
e. The applicant shall obtain a floodplain development permit from the City
of Aspen Engineering Department.
f. A financial guarantee shall be provided for the ditch proposed to be
relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and
assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not
diminished as a result of the relocation.
g. The site plan submitted with the building permit application shall clearly
delineate the top of slope.
h. Confirmation from the Army Corps of Engineers that no wetlands permits
shall be required for this application.
3. A written notice shall be given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to
any alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and a copy of said notice shall be
submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
4. The landscape plan shall limit new plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and
grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the riverside to native
riparian vegetation.
5. If the newly enclosed area plus the area of the exiting structure exceeds 5,000
square feet, the newly enclosed area may be required to be sprinkled. The plans
will be reviewed with the Fire Marshall at the time of application for a building
permit.
Section 2
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 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 regular meeting on October 1, 2002.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION:
City Attorney
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
a
•Oi
0 5_ 10 �20. -�O AC AFT
HIM I
5cA1 I °= lot
NOTES :
TORX�AfW Ib 'FtFOW CITY AIK't OHO
Dr CL70FtKAEi"C4AL.
2E
fit' ��A • 2G, l of �C,z. Fr. �/ -'"
&KEA UNGM WAT-K, .3, 22G.7
NEr A• U,874.3 tq. FT-14
r'
GOTTONwo00
/CO) AN A N O F/ K
.................................
� -,� , of � ...... •. ...... ... .
(ZI IA
1��� CAP
L.51`\� o �, . •' •/%y� _� \�� N
LL. 33.2 .2� �. 27 . �` \ _ (( F.L. 7 /a' 2
EXISTING TREES _ —.3� _:_-- =----_ < •so �,.. �, - a '`-�� 1�'"
1 12' t)PROC& I-5 t)rKaAV NI i -) �\
ti 2, i� tip' �'• _
n c5 1
25 li,
Co 14'liZ
7
2,j wCOp Co' OPftEAO
"90 NIGH20
�•
10
A w
ID'
4O'
3g
20•
t
\\
3
15
16
4'
17
`N.
III
Cc
22
r-
23
2� ' CoT 1aNvjD
23
Col CP,&5APPk7LE
•4' PI
26
4"
27
2A
D'
5' 5PRtzI:
r
F� JT/Ll
to .0
:o j; , �,, r, i2
20
s
�N%
t
co
,to
M
Go
C.� C) W � I
C/)
i
GU o
W a
Z A
"W
W A) o a
i
t
z
1 CD
Q tZ-I Q
0
` �UJ Wei
W u z CO
a
P LLI �
' q w o l
W H I
( Y i
I cy v1 W ¢zl
ipqW
W n-
ry
1 {pq
Li
i
11
1
ROAM I/1' I'-W'
R•v4ion•:
11tD� 'I
JULY 5. 2002
Exhibit A
J
M
0
FOUND•: RZ-B-AR NO CAP
2Q
Op
FOUND: REB'AR CAP
G.TTTO AI-5.12707
\
w
CD
LOT 17 ,
r \
P I"I RUCE
i t \
S--� 1
V,
�..05 ' \
m 1 f �;
`o� I arrrro�two0�g kxp FIR
u SW-:_ ;� i T'L � n ., l� "
l� ! TP P Ro x t a YLy
- ' TOO C)WOOD
ro.-4' H
TELEPHONE BOXO
PIPE UNDEEZ PAR,ICt R30-0
A P. ;:- p, : w l Wr A K E. 4--
AN � OQTS 7� �� WOOD BRIDGE B D
C A R�DCE ,
49
L.E
FZ E- GL u t
tj
4
fl
Zoo
E s A i--�
-To >3� MovF-D
WWUM C. ANNULII�T'�
Planning - Architecture
Development - Bro4er
101 IMDEPEMDEMCE PLACE
ASPE11, CO 8IMI
P. 970-9Z5-19hl
F. 970-US-9454
Exhibit B
P13
► \srcE�, sr. w••o fr.
�Tt•� WMo /\//
}TN. jryt.
IAII
s»an
' TA �.
W 0•p• . \
T.•r.s s ��r ` \
. pMdT
\\
-news" ^Ttr t_
ItFYCHIM
�ea-- YID Imam \
KFAW
_ `• ' gkr_.._.r- • .- - I / •ice.. .. -
.0"I ROOM
w
Iz-,
N
U
Oa�ga
p
W p
i
cnW�..
Cl)
01
rl
W
cr
W
a
p .A
o
Q
Z
H
~ H
Q
Q
H
W J
Lj -4
w �
a'
z W
U W
Q
Q OL
pq 0
U
W
E1
I
W J
Y
U
< z
a
i�Li
vaN
w
�o
¢
ppqq W
F--
ZrLLJ
o
D 06
cy-
SCALE: 1/4" = V-0'
Exhibit C
t
--------
= PI IZ ..
E--1
Z
a
a
ct)
WW
�L'
A
W o
W V
Z
A
o
W
q
o -cg
a
Z
C1
Q Q
W
H
a
UW=°
cx
Zry,
v00
a
q0
po
U
0
Y
Z
LLJ
cj�—
LLJ
Jw
U
Q
n
ry r
ti
W :�E:
pa L.Ll
H
Z
o
LLJ
D �.
fy
l7
SCM2: 1/40 = 1'-0"
Dsla
JULY S, 2002
S888T:
A-2
.
1 •
NORTH El EYATtON
• ' SCALE: i'-9"
WEST ELEVATION
tN SEC.oND PL. ± 7 7 `� 9
Dm 77101
w
F+
w
I (a
H
U
�
ovoo•
cn
�a�
P4
w
av m
CZ
w a
}�
Q
w.,cn
H w ab
A
o 4 o
,mow
Z
a
•
H
AQW
Q cH
Q
H
W
�
W
zo
Zry
u cX)
E
W n
cy-
°q 0
1-4
Q
LLJ
U
w
_1
W
J tw
A
m N
W Z
M W
f-
Z ry
0
D 06
CY_
SCALB: 1/4' = 1'-0'
Data.
S_ 2002
Exhibit D
EAST ELEVATION
wz��
tp
a
n
U p
cm
w
OavA�
c
m
W
W O
W U
a
C
A
Z
i
n
��zwa
wA
p co
w
Z
Q Q
W
rMCST F4-OOP- 77Y0*
A z
Q �
F-
Q
W j
W
O
z =
�cy-
U 0D
LLJ
Q
w v
N
W I
¢ Z
w
rJ
Li0-
JW
�Q
a
¢
LLJ 2:
r,
pq LLI
F-
W ry
o
LL
L
SCALE: 1/40 1'-0'
Dsla:
JULY 5, 2002
SHBBT.
A-3
P18
0
Name:
Location:
kPPLICANT:
ATTACHMENT 2 —LAND USE APPLICATION
William & Joice Gruenberg Residdnce - Addition and Remodel
1170 River Drive, Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 17 Black Birch Estates Subdivisi
(Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate)
Name: William & Joice Gruenber¢
Address: 1170 River Drive, Aspen CO 81611
Phone 9: 970-925-4287
REPRESENTATIVE:
\lame: John "Randy" Wedum of Wedum & Associates - Architect
kddress: 101 Independence Place, Aspen, CO 81611
Phone #; 970-925-1961
PROJECT:
❑ Conceptual PUD
❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment)
❑ Conceptual SPA
❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment)
❑ Subdivision
❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes
condominiumization)
❑
Conceptual Historic Devt.
❑
Final Historic Development
❑
Minor Historic Devt.
❑
Historic Demolition
❑
Historic Designation
❑
Small Lodge Conversion/
Expansion
❑ Other:
FEES DUE: S / 2. 0 S
Exhibit E
Project:
Applicant:
Location:
i_j ne District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
ATTACHMENT
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM
Gruenberg Residence Addition
William & Joice Gruenberg
1170 River Drive As en CO
R-30
and Remodel
ulatin� Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced to the
(for the purposes of calc
high water mark, easements, and steep Slopes- Please refer
tivtthtn the g
definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable:
Existing:
Proposed:
1 Proposed. -
1
Number of residentialExisting:
Existing:____
3 Proposed:
4
Number of bedrooms:
Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only):
DIMENSIONS:
Existing: 2908
Allowable: 4968
Proposed: 4968
25
Floor Area:
25
Allowable: 25
Proposed:
Principal bldg. height:
Existing:
Allowable:
Proposed:
Access. bldg. height:
Existing:
Required: 2
Proposed: 3
On -Site parking:
E.�jsting. 2
Required:
Proposed:------
%Site coverage:
-
g•
Existing:
Requir ed•
proposed:
% Open Space:
Existing:
Required: 25
Proposed. 25
Front Setback:
Existing: 25
- Required: 15
Proposed: 15
Rear Setback:
Existing: 15
Required:----
proposed:
to
Combined F/R:
Existing:
g�l0
10
Required:
proposed:
Side Setback:
Existing:
Required: l0
10
Proposed:
Side Setback.
Q l0
Existing.
Required: -------Proposed:
Combined Sides:
Existing:
_Exis ting S to'
rage shed is aproximately
line to e move
g non -conformities ore encroachments: pro
3 feet over thhmen s:
Existine southwest P
Variations requested:
. 1
17)9
D V M
ARCHnCT & ASSOCIATF-S
j 101 Independence Place
Aspen, Co. 8 1611
Phone: 303-92--1961
Fax 303-925-8454
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Stream Margin Review
Item 7 & 10 Attachment 4
July 19, 2002
Addressing Item 7
The applicant is planning on adding 2060 sq. ft. to the existing single-family
residence. In the attached addition to the west of the existing property, a 2,car
garage is being added with laundry and mudroom, and a sculpture shop. A new
entry is also included on the main level. This is in Phase One. • Above in the roof
there is a second level with a bathroom and an art studio/ optional grand kid
bunkroom. Phase two will consist of remodeling the main house, by adding to the
second level of the existing residence to enlarge the master bedroom over existing
space below.
An extra parking space is being provided in addition to the garage and two
parking spaces in front of the garage.
The development complies with all setbacks, height limits and FAR.
The new construction is totally out of the 100-flood plane.
Alpine Survey, supplies the top of bank line on the survey plan for your
acceptance and approval, as the city map has that line at the top of the hill behind
the whole area of lots on the river.
Addressing Item 10
The construction is typical trench excavation with a poured foundation and
footers to below frost line, with a slab on grade. The building will be wood stick
framed walls and roofs, with a stone base and Stucco finished walls to match the
existing building. Wood insulated window units with a heavy timber frame trim to
match the existing building. The roof will be a combination of shakes to match the
existing building and metal roofs.
s•..-u. e.,r•s^:-'.•."r-r::'v`;'.."p"",T'.:'-r•-R':,,•1•-p-��'^r'-:y'w.'ri....tiru.r'-r'[�,\T.*.4�r,.,'{��:'Ft Fi.`,"�r"{�-".•�•`cr--•s ,phi.?'" �� �_,.�1''�tki i..�'.� T,'! 't
T'!�`y"'•"TMt777'r:,.rll`'�:tt7-."s..�r.. =J'- -�, i4 Y i , C,1�'a` y �,1 -� i� ` r, ,i 1 '•h. i� - ,�
.. y .f... f�. ,�." `",r... t ..,. � .�, w.. �i., �s. ., � t � 1 r .},' � �� �' �� s'.�1 '� ;' „J`t�+f^`,�r.,�•
P2
EDUM
RCHrFECT & ASSOCIATES
101 Independence Place
Aspen, Co. 8 1 o 11
Phone: 303-925-1961
Fax: 303-925-8454
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Stream Margin Review
Attachment 4
July 22, 2002
Addressing Item 7 — Gruenberg Stream Margin Review
HOW THIS DEVELOPMENT COMPLIES WITH THE REWIEW STANDARDS
The development application is a request for a Stream Margin Review for
construction.on an addition and remodel of the existing structure.
A. The Stream Margin Review is required because the site is on the river
and the building is with -in 150' of the center of the river.
B. The Bank Line needs to me amended from the City FIood map to the
actual bank line of the property as shown on the Survey.
C. All other Items comply with requirements of the Land Use Code.
Items in list required
1. Supplied in letter with application
2. Supplied in letter with application
3. Supplied with application
4. Supplied with application
5. Supplied with application
6. Supplied with application
7. The applicant is planning on adding 2060 sq. ft. to the existing single
family residence. In the attached addition to the west of the existing
property, a 2-car garage is being added with laundry and mudroom, and
a sculpture shop. A new entry is also included on the main level This is
in Phase One. Above in the roof there is a second level with a bathroom
and an art studio/ optional grand kid bunkroom. Phase two will consist
of remodeling the main house, by adding to the second Ievel of the
existing residence to enlarge the master bedroom over existing space
below.
An extra parking space is being provided in addition to the garage and
two parking spaces in front of the garage.
The development complies with all setbacks, height limits and FAR.
9
.dressing Item 7 — Gruenberg Stream Margin Review
The new construction is totally out of the 100-flood plane.
N
Alpine Survey, supplies the top of bank Iine on the survey plan for your
acceptance and approval, as the city map has that line at the top of the
hill behind the whole area of lots on the river.
8. Supplied on Site plan with drawings
9. Supplied with drawings
10. The construction is typical trench excavation with a poured foundation
and footers to blow frost line, with a slab on grade. The building will be wood stick
framed with a stone base and Stucco finished walls, to match the existing building.
Wood insulated window units with a heavy timber frame trim to match the existing
building. The roof will be a combination of shakes,to match the existing building
and metal roofs.
11. Supplied on Survey
12. Supplied in drawings
P23
of Aspen Community Development Department
;am Margin Review
n 1 & 2 Attachment 4
19, 2002
This letter is to establish John "Randy" Wedum of Wedum &Associatesr our
authorized to ion "r behalf for the application for Stream Margin Review fo
addition and remodel of our property at 1170 River Drive, Aspen, Colorado.
His information is provided as follows:
Applicant Agent:
John "Randy" Wedum
Wedum & Associates
101 Independence Place
Aspen, CO 81611
Phone: 970-925-1961
Applicant:
William and Joyce Gruenberg
1170 River Drive, Aspen, CO 81611
Phone: 970-925-4287
The property being submitted for Stream Margin Review is 1170 River Drive,
Aspen, Colorado. It is Lot 17 Black Birch Estates.
Owners
KIN COUNTY
CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP
Pitkin County Title, Inc,, a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the State of Colorado hereby certifies that
WILLIAM A. GRUENBERG AS TRUSTEE OF THE WILLIAM A. GRUENBERG REVOCABLE TRUST
UNDER AGREEMENT DATED MARCH 31, 1982 AND JOYCE GRUENBERG AS TRUSTEE OF THE
JOYCE GRUENBERG REVOCABLE TRUST UNDER AGREEMENT DATED IvL-kY 5, 1982 are the
owner's in fee simple of the following described property:
LOT 17, BLACK BIRCH ESTATES, as shown on the Plat recorded in Plat Book 3 at Page 264.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, ST.A.TE OF COLORADO
ENCUMBRANCES: NONE '
Subject to easements, rights of way and recorded matters.
This certificate is riot to be constrtied to be a guarantee of title and is furnished for informational purposes only.
PITKI.N COUNT
BY:
authorized si
CERTIFIED TO;
INC.
[9, 2002 @ 8:00 A.M.
P25
P F4
Beach Environmental, LLC
William Gruenberg
c/o Randy Wedum
Wedum and Associates
101 Independence Place
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Lot 17 Black Birch Estates
Dear Randy:
September 5, 2002
In response to our telephone conversation this afternoon, I have reviewed the survey
for the Gruenberg Property and I agree that the wetland area mentioned in my letter of
August 21, 2002 is not on the Gruenberg property, it is on the property directly
downstream. I regret this oversight and any confusion it may have caused.
Secondly, please know that since the work that is being proposed includes only a
relocation of an existing ditch; and the ditch will be relocated on the Gruenberg
property only; and no jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the proposed work;
and the work does not change the characteristics of the flood plain; and the ditch does
not presently lie within the 100 year flood plain, there are no notifications required by
either the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
By
Gary4k--
CEI, RWS
Princi
0338L2 clarify.wpd
715 W. Main Exhibit F
Suite 304
Aspen, CO 8161 1
Tel (970) 925-3475
Fax 925-4754
P26
1
Beach Environmental, LLC
August 21, 2002
Wj Iliam, Gruenberg
c/o Randy Wedum
WFdum and Associate
10� Independence Pla e
M len, Colorado 8161
Re: Lot 17 Black Birch Estates
D ar Randy:
� o 4::
As a follow-up to our onversation) please be advised that I have physically inspected
th property located at 1170 Riverside Drive, Lot 17 Mack Birch Estates to determine
if ny jurisdictional W tlands would be impacted by your proposed plans to relocate
point further to the southwest of its existing location (as i
th existing Tagert Ditch to a
shown on revised site plan dated 08/17/02). The findings of my investigation show
th t no impact to juris fictional wetlands will occur b� the proposed relocation of the
Bert ert Ditch.
,
T�e only jurisdictiona wetlands existing on the prop, rty are located in and directly
ad acent to the Roarin, Fork River. Immediately adjacent to the river and down
gr dient of the small i'nigation pond there exists a small jurisdictional wetland area
th t does not appear to be directly influenced by the itch. This area should not be
i
�,take steps to ensure that no
i pacted by your proposed construction but you shod
; ' ''
pacts to this area occur.
Iflyou have any questions, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
B
Ga each
bES, CEI, RWS
P PrincincipiD
0338L findings.wpd
715 W. M,1111
Stiltc 304
A,,pcn, CO 8101 1
TO (970) 925-3475
F,kx
' Vic: iucd�: ���. ;,,... •:,Poa
i
TREE REMOV:
PER_-YuT �PPLICATION
The followiu� is an Outline to assist in the preparation of a tree remQv3l permit.
+1 ,%cte.ci�ra,�Y_ng of crorerircit:do:
cj LccaZions of'auildings on the oronerriv.
r-� *e—of trees on n-O.C': � a*1Q dCsl�ilc t�
d) LCCariCL',a�1G'�..., aI1Q 5pS ..
wit`._ a -ows Cr C'.yCl�s which tr\'.Cs arC to be removes.
Drive Aspen, CO 8.1,611
3) Lisp .ices to'ce removed, species and diameter a� ,J' abov- ar" e.
-.2`(<"
C, - a o'
d) Reason for Removal
Trees are to close to house and the roots are effecting the floor in sun room
Branches and debris fall on solar skylights and tree-s cut=out sun
Trees are in area for expansion t.o connect to garage area only location
Due to the age, height, and wet ground conditions they are aQwind hazard
5) %-Ldgation Plir, (relocation of trees or rccomparable uioz� tre..a as oL S
reTerenced in Aspen tilurucipal Code Sec. 1)-76, (e)). Add to Pronerry Drawing.
a} Location of replaccnientlrelocation trees.
b) Size and species of trees to be replaced.
a) Co,r_pleon. Dot: oz P:ojcc: Fall 2003
7) Pe:son responsi"OIZ for prOject (applicant): John Randy Wedum
John "Randy" Wedum
Wil m u nberg
\era of Azc.�itect er COIISZUC7:i r. Representative
Propd:ry' Ow-er
1170 River Drive, Aspen, CO 81611
�ddres�: ?hone Na�ex Exhibit G
S i_ran=re Date
MUST -BE POSTED ON PROPERTY DURING R.EMOVkL
t -
P28 MUST BE POSTED ON PROPERTY
Inspection of the property was performed and the following information was gathered. The
applicant has requested to remove three trees labeled A,C,E on the plans.
Tree'A 24" cottonwood value $161277.00 partial mitigation required
Tree C ?0" cottonwood value $117304.00 no mitigation, structural damage
Tree E 24" cottonwood value $16,277.00 no mitigation, structural damage
Based on previous plantings, current health and quality of property in addition to planned on -site
landscaping the mitigation amount for Tree A is $8,000.00.
Mitigation Total:
$8,000.00
This mitigation can be met with the submission of a detailed landscape plan identifying locations
of new trees or plantings and the total cost of installation and cash in -lieu.
Please see below for other conditions.
Property/Tree Inspection:
Brian Flynn
August 14, 2002
Parks and Open Space Coordinator, Date
Comments:
The following criteria must also be met.
2
Signatur / ate
%- A landscape cost estimate must be received upon receipt of permit.
A construction fence must be erected along the drip -line of all trees and shrubs on site.
This fence is to be constructed in such a manner that the area inside the drip -line is
protected. An inspection of this fence must -be performed before any construction
activities begin. Please arrange this inspection with Aaron Reed at 920-5126.
r No materials may be stored within this protection area, including but not limited to,
construction backfill, construction traffic, or any other construction materials.
No excavation within this area may be preformed without the consent of the City of
Aspen Forester.
This permit must be posted on site during the construction process.
Accepted / Denied
Stephen Ellsperman
Deputy Director, City of Aspen
i ture Date
Permit Valid for one year after approval date.
a 'F°
t1
�
WEDUM
ARCHITECT & ASSOCIATES
101 Independence Place
Aspen, Co. 81611
Phone: 303-925-1961
Fax: 303-925-8454
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
James Lindt, Planner
REQUEST FOR A VARA.NCE FOR NON- ORTHOGONAL WINDOWS
01 Gruenberg Stream Margin Review
Lot 17 Black Birch Estates, 1170 River Drive, Aspen Co
August 17, 2002
This letter is a request by the owner to get a variance from the design review
requirement concerning non -orthogonal windows.
The property is at the end of the road in an old subdivision. It is heavily wooded
and is visually blocked from view by the road or any other house.
The entry on the addition has an eyebrow window above the entry, and we are
placing them over the garage doors for drainage and to tie in the entry. Also in Part 2 of
the remodel we will be remodeling the upper level of the existing house, were we have
added eyebrow windows to this fagade to tie the new addition into the main house.
They main entry element needs to be reflected in other elements of a building for
balance and visual continuity, and residential architecture is no different. To have one
element on a fagade as a limit is not esthetically pleasing or balanced.
I do not know how this concept was developed or what its intent was, but due to
its location and non visibility from anyone, it should not have to be applied here.
We sincerely request a variance from the non -orthogonal window design standard
.on this residence, for our eye -brow windows.
Exhibit H
P29
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
FROM: Chris Bendon, Senior Long Range Planner
RE: City of Aspen Infill Program — Continued Public Hearing
DATE: Octoberl, 2002
SUMMARY:
This meeting is the third substantive review meeting to consider amendments to the
Land Use Code related to the Infill Report. Included, by reference, to the previous
memorandum were exhibits for revised and new sections of the Land Use Code
contained in a 3-ring binder. Tonight's focus will be on Parking (proposed text L
and existing text LL), Commercial Design Standards (Section H), and Pedestrian
Amenity (proposed text J and existing text JJ.
REFERENCE MATERIALS:
Proposed and Existing legislation, 3-Ring Binder (distributed 9.17.02)
Infill Report (distributed 9.3.02)
1