HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19960806AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1996) 4:30 PM
SISTER CITIES MEETING ROOM, CITY HALL
I. COMMENTS
A. Commissioners
B.. Planning Staff
C. Public
II. MINUTES
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Maroon Creek Club Rezoning, Mary Lackner
B. Pickus Conditional Use for ADU, Bob Nevins
C. Day Subdivision, Stream Margin Review & GMQS Exemption, Bob Nevins (to
be tabled to 9/3/96)
D. COLAS Investment Conditional Use for ADU and Stream Margin Review (cont.
from 7/2), Bob Nevins
IV. ADJOURN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Rhonda Harris; Administrative Assistant
RE: Upcoming Agendas
DATE: August 1, 1996
August 7 - Special Meeting (5:30 PM)
Aspen Mountain PUD (DM)
August 20 - Regular Meeting (4:30 PM)
Winnerman Stream Margin Review (SW)
305 S . Galena Conditional Use Review (SW)
Vet Text Amendment and Conditional Use for ADU (SW)
Aspen Mountain PUD (DM) (cont. Public Hearing)
Viewplane Worksession
Aspen Valley Hospital Master Plan Amendment, Rezoning, 1041 Hazard Review, Special
Review, GMQS Exemption Referral (ES)
September 3 - Regular. Meeting (4:30 PM)
Valerio/Johnson 8040 Greenline and Conditional Use for ADU (SW)
Day Subdivision, Stream Margin Review & GMQS Exemption, Bob Nevins (cont. from 8/6)
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
RE: Maroon Creek Club Rezoning in association with Annexation
FROM: Mary Lackner, Planner
DATE: August 6,1996
REQUEST: This is a staff initiated rezoning map amendment in response to the pending
annexation of the Maroon Creek Club Subdivision into the City of Aspen. The developers
of the Maroon Creek Club Subdivision filed a water service agreement with the City of
Aspen and agreed to annex the parcel in 1991. The City is now following up on the
annexation of this subdivision. The Pfeifer land lease for a 55 acre portion of the golf
course, indicated as letter D on the map, is not included in the annexation or rezoning.
SUMMARY: Staff is recommending approval of this rezoning. The Maroon Creek Club
Subdivision contains approximately 369 acres. The project has obtained approvals from
Pitkin County that were completed in 1993. The project consists of a golf course, 42 single
family residences, 37 townhomes, 50 affordable dwelling units, and the redevelopment of
the Grand Champions Club to accommodate nine tennis courts,12 lodge rooms, an 8,000
sq.ft. maintenance facility, and 30,100 sq.ft. addition to the club.
Staff is proposing that this parcel be rezoned with a PUD overlay over the entire parcel
and the use of eight existing zone districts to reflect current approvals on the various
parcels.
APPLICANT: City of Aspen.
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: John Worcester, City Attorney.
LOCATION: The Maroon Creek. Club Subdivision is located adjacent to Highway 82
immediately west of the Maroon Creek Bridge. Two Pfister out -parcels and the City of
Aspen water tank parcel are being considered in this rezoning. The Pfeifer land lease is
excluded from the rezoning and annexation.
ZONING: Exhibit A and Map A illustrate the existing County. zone districts that are in
place in this subdivision. Exhibit A and Map B cont,�in the proposed City zone
designations for the subdivision.
PROCESS: The Planning and Zoning Commission is being asked to forward a
recommendation on the rezoning classifications to City Council. The Aspen City Council
has not approved annexation of the property, but will be considering that in conjunction
with the recommended rezoning.
STAFF COMMENTS: This section of the memorandum is broken down into the
following categories to review compliance with the adopted land use regulations of the
City of Aspen:
General Issues
Rezoning (Map Amendment)
General Issues
Staff has reviewed the Detailed Submission and Final Plat documents of the Maroon
Creek Subdivision to determine the approved development and existing zoning of this
subdivision.
Due to the extensive development approved for this subdivision (there are 52
development lots and 21 golf course/commons parcels) staff is recommending eight
different zone districts to be applied to various parcels. Staff is also recommending a
PUD overlay for the entire subdivision and an SPA overlay on Lot 51 which contains the
Grand Champions Club.
The project was a complex PUD with extensive negotiations for the number and size of
residences; floor -area calculations, and siting of residences for limited visual impact. It's
staffs recommendation that the City adopt the Maroon Creek Club PUD, general
submission, detailed submission, final plat, subdivision improvements agreements, and
any other pertinent agreements for implementation of the project approvals. This also
maintains the approvals and project that was reviewed and approved by the County.
Future amendments to the development plan would be reviewed' pursuant to the
amendment process adopted in the Aspen Municipal Code.
Rezoning (Amendment to the Zone District Map)
As part of the annexation of this property into the City, rezoning of the property is
required. Section 26.92.020 establishes the following review criteria for a rezoning
application.
2
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
Response: The proposed development will need to comply with all provisions of the
Aspen Municipal Code.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all
elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Response: The proposed annexation of the Maroon Creek Club is compatible with the
AACP and more specifically the Annexation Element of the plan that was endorsed by
the Aspen Planning. and Zoning Commission on June 18, 1996 and approved by City
Council on July 8,1996.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with
surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering
existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Response: The surrounding neighborhood is a mix of residential, lodge uses, and
recreational uses. The rezoning of the parcel to compatible city zone districts maintains
the project integrity and conditions of approval imposed by the Board of County
Commissioners. No changes are proposed to the project elements.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation
and road safety.
Response: Since this is a rezoning for the purposes of annexing the parcel into the City of
Aspen no traffic safety for generation issues are created. However, an original condition
of approval of the project was to build the grade -separated interchange at Tiehack Road
and Highway 82. This has been constructed and has decreased traffic crossing Highway
82 as a result of this development.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment
would result in demands on public facilities, and whether
and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but
not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities,
water supply, parks, ► drainage, schools, and emergency
medical facilities.
3
Response: These items were addressed and mitigated for in the County approvals of the
project. No additional demands are anticipated as a result of this annexation/rezoning.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment
would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural
environment. -
Response: These items were addressed and mitigated for in the County approvals of the
project. No adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of this annexation/rezoning.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and
compatible with the community character in the City of
Aspen.
Response: The annexation and rezoning have been evaluated for compatibility with
community character in the original reviews. No changes are being proposed and
therefore the project is considered to meet this standard.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which
support the proposed amendment.
Response:. There are no changed conditions relating to the rezoning that will affect the
surrounding neighborhood. In the future, the annexation may result in additional lands
being eligible for annexation as the City boundary has extended to the west.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict
with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose
and intent of this. chapter.
Response: The proposal is consistent with the standards of the Aspen Municipal Code.
SUMMARY: This is a straight -forward request for rezoning, as the property already has
full development approvals and has proceeded with construction. The rezoning is
essential to the annexation of the subdivision into the City of Aspen. Staff has done its
best at identifying compatible city zone districts and is recommending eight to be applied
to various parcels within the subdivision. Since the subdivision was a PUD in the
County, and there are several differences between City and County zoning, staff is
recommending that the entire subdivision be rezoned with a PUD overlay in addition to
the individual parcel zoning.
T.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a
recommendation of approval for rezoning the Maroon Creek Club Subdivision as follows:
Pfister Outparcels
Water Tank Parcel
RR
C
PUD Overlay on all lettered and numbered parcels
Lot # Proposed Cit Z� oning
1-5
RR
6-12
R-15A
13
AH
14
C
15
C
16
RR
17
RMF-A
18
RMF-A
19 - 40
R-15A
41- 45
RR
46 - 48
R-15A
49
C
50
RMF-A
51
RR/ SPA
52
AH
A-C
P
D
excluded Pfeifer land lease parcel
E-G
OS
H-K
WP
L-N
OS
P-S
WP
T-U
OS
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to recommend that the Aspen City Council adopt the
rezoning of the Maroon Creek Club as outlined in the August 6,1996 memorandum to the
Planning and Zoning Commission."
5
Exhibits:
A Table of existing and proposed zone districts. Brief description of the
approved development for each lot.
Maps:
A Maroon Creek Club Existing County Zone Districts
B Maroon Creek Club Proposed City Zone Districts
r-I
C
R
cn
N to
121 NO,
�2
..�
j
i rJ •
i
�-•
CD
i a
CD
�c
CD
c;
ici
c�J��
c-j�
ci
v
cu
cD
iCD
T.
Ci 'J
(D
N
:�
00
cn
N
•J
/1
O
cn
«vim
C�
(in
('D
[D
�^
cn
i
aaa I;F 1�j>aJ> >1> >�>>
:� ::�I:� 10010::�1::� 1::�0100'
0
rt
w
N
a
a
C!�
0
n•
V �f
C
n
O
U
0
cr
cD
W
I Ij "Ic
�i
(-A (-A
00 Cl\
6 O
•A N
.tom •�
Oro UQ
0 0
l I l I
O. 0
cn cn
CD CD
CD
*iv I-V
o
00
ON
V
N
r
0000
s
FW+
<
N
O
O
<
<
(D
tJ
W
N
O
J
O
N
P
N
J
0000
0-0
O�
0000
N
N
n ►�-�
v�i
0
00
00
•-r
ON
ON
O
O
ch
p7'
00
O
'-
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
En'-ti
`11
O
O
rO
O
c�D
N
CD
N
�.
CD
y
t~D
�.
CDO
E
c�
CD
CD
z
a
cD
CD
cj
a
b
b
a
a
a
CD
Ci
0
tD
cD
�
0
0
co
n
�'
cD
�
0
d
0
w
w
c�
via
«o
CD
C
o
o
+�
c,
w
r
a
V
N
z
N
y
�
in
=V G
rA
- G
En
� G
�
=' 0
0
(D
It
p
ci
p .r.
¢
p . .
a
p F
a
p
a.
<
CD
<
CD0
0
0
0
na
cra
ac
va
as
'0
(DD
(DD
BCD
CCD
a
a
a.
a
�3
N
-e
�
CD
ti
' '
�
0
C
�
<
�
C
C
Y
CCD
O
O
CD
O
CCD
O
0
N
-
:D.
-
CD
C)
b
(D
(D
cD
�
CD
�'
O
p
o
0
o
x
Pi
a
a
oy
o
n
n o
o o
CCD
C)�o
(()o
cD
CD
cnEn
o
r.
cD
o
p
CA
x
w
C
w
BCD
p
o
l J
N
w
CD W
o --
CD p
o
CD
c�
J
J
In
N
Gn
Gn
�o
�7J
a
a
�d
�7d
_x
Cn
O
to
Ch
N
N
O
[xx/�
Cxx/�
;Z;
O
zz
�
�
N
a
a
a
��
� a
a
�o
g
o ?
N
�0
=1CD
..
o.�
a
O
CD
z
�
z
o
s
�,
0'3
0„bTJ
O�
C ..,
N
Ul
C
O
n
C)
n
r
r
r
._.
W
O
N
.pCD
�
�
v'
D'�
LA
(.A
�D
--1
�D
vA
J
Q�
00
O
N
�
n
.
nb n
G
"--
b
O
a- w
v`Yi
7r
"U
0
+n
cro
Q
00 0
,O
C
N
O O
w
d
y CL
.n o no
r
y y
y
r
tI. . o , •
Q
ti 0
e-r rr
5 .^.
co
i
crQ
aQ
coo
�v°
Cn
r
C/I
C/)
CL
►�
a
;D.
O.
Co
Q.
CD
O
CD
CL
�a
c�
Q O
n c�
00
naCD
no
O
rb
w
O
c�
o
(D y
m
o
r' t
tt
w
w
�
G
0
y
x
z
�z
n
b
n
��
Fid
a
n
o
�
N
°z
0
EXISTING
Ma r o o n Cr e e k
County Zo n i n g
A F- SKI
AFR-10
r.�iAWP UB
R- 15
R - 3 0
Mal
HMI,llm
lj
ci t y
Li mi is
I i
7ZII S MI P/ DRA MI NO I S I O?l 'S' CA L
REPA g SENTATION OP
THE
9 YfliV"s
DEPICTED
TED AND IS NOT A ZZO!'
REP RE SEN 7 ATI 0 N. THE ICCURICT
ml r C I" N 0 E D ff "'Y"ING ON THE L N L A it G 9 u 5 N 7' OR )t 5 D V C T 1 Ott.
II inch - 3 0 0 f ,
& 1996 Cf:y,of A,p,n
PROPOSED
A
Ma r o o n Cr e e k
Ci t y Zo n i n g
A H
c
. . . . . . .......
,z
f
q_
- - - - - - - - - - - - -- -
V
os
p
I F
R- 1 SA
RMF- A
RR
S P A
LK/') 1/
Ov e r I a
F-- -71
WP
INPr
o p o s e d
ci f y
Limits
THIS All!'IDRAFING E 5 15 A GXA 91 CAL
J, A. REPRESENTATION 0 THE
5 EA V
DEPICTED AND IS NOT A EGAL
REPRESENTATION. THE ICCVXLCT
J-(Ar CHANGE DEPENDING
ON
TIIE
ENLARGEMENT OR RE D V C I 1
II i . c h = a 0 0 f , ". I
V 1996 Cl ry o f A,p,.
E X I S T I N G
�, ��\` • 1
Maroon Creek
Count y Z 0 n i ng
i
A F- SKI
�• / 4\ �r . /� A F R - 1 0
.` tit -r;v T, -.�� r v :•:uv \�
w
AFR- 2
i
A R - 2
4
Ir 44 ( i \ PMH
--- J43
P UB
R- 15
R- 30
?F
L I m1 t s
1
5
THl S YIP/ DXSn'I NO I S A OXdPHI CAL
EEPXES ENTS Ti ON Ol 7HE PELT UXES
DEPICTED AND IS
NOT A LEOAL
XEPXESENTA7I ON. THE dCCUEd CT
mAr CHd NOE DEPENDl NO ON THE
ENLdXOEYP NT X X OED UC71011.
l I 800 feet
1996 Clty of Aspen
1
•
i J
H
I PROPOSED
444
Maroon Creek
City Zoning
%� ■ A H
i
/ C
�f P
R- 1 5A
R MF - A
RR
i
J SPA
Overt ay
WP
P r o p o s e d
' C i t y
L i mi t s
01)-
THI S AfAPI DRANI NO I S A OR APHI CAL
RBPR H SHNTATI 01: 0P THH FEATURES
DHPI CTHD AND IS NOT A LEGAL
RHPR H SHN T A 710 N. 7HH ACCURACY
MAY CIIA NOH DH P H NDI NO ON 71IH
ENLARGEMENT OR RHDUCTI ON.
I i n c h = 8 0 0 f e e t
Oc 1996 City of Aspen
Ron
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Bob Nevins, City Planner
THRU: Dave Michaelson, Deputy Directox�'IA .
RE: Pickus Accessory Dwelling Unit Conditional Use Review - Public Hearing
Parcel ID No. 2735-122-14-001
DATE: August 6, 1996
SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a 685 sf Accessory Dwelling Unit
which will contain approximately 635 sf of net livable area. The studio unit is to be
located in the below -grade level of an expanded and remodeled, half -duplex. Attached is
the Conditional Use Application as Exhibit A; the referral comments as Exhibit B; and
the Restrictive Covenant as Exhibit C.
Community Development staff recommends that the conditional use for an Accessory
Dwelling Unit at 1425 Silverking Drive, Unit B, City of Aspen be approved with
conditions.
APPLICANT: Sallie Pickus
LOCATION: 1425 Silverking Drive, Unit B, (Lot 1, West Aspen Subdivision,
Filing No. 2) City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado.
ZONING: Moderate -Density Residential (R-15)
LAND USE: Duplex (Condominiumized)
LOT AREA: 15,025 s.f.
FAR: 4,921.5 s.f.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: To construct a studio accessory dwelling unit containing
approximately 635 sf of net liveable area in lieu of a cash payment pursuant to the
conditions set forth in Section 26.100.050, (A)(2)(c)(2)(b). See Exhibit D.
REVIEW PROCESS: Accessory Dwelling Units require conditional use approval by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. It is a one-step review at a public hearing that
requires notification to be published, posted and mailed.
BACKGROUND: The existing duplex was condominiumized in May 1996. The Pickus
residence, Unit B, contains a Limited Common Element (L.C.E.) of 6,065 s.f.. The
applicant is proposing to remodel and expand their residence, and to provide an
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). The proposed ADU is in accordance with both the
Aspen Land Use Requirements and the Unit B Restrictive Covenants (Exhibit Q.
The Accessory Dwelling Unit is a 685 s.f. studio with a kitchen and full -bath. It contains
approximately 635 s.f.of net liveable area. The unit has a separate, private entry
adjoining the garage and facing Cemetery Lane. There is also an interior doorway
connecting the ADU with the study of the main house. The unit is completely below -
grade. Natural light and ventilation is provided to the ADU by a series of window -wells
and clerestory windows. A single, uncovered, off-street parking space is adjacent to the
ADU entrance.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Attached as Exhibit B are the comments from the City
Engineer, Housing Office, and Parks Department.
STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 26.60.040, a development application for a
conditional use approval shall meet the following standards:
A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and standards
of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the zone district in which it
is proposed to be located;
RESPONSE: Included within the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan is the Housing
Action Plan which establishes a policy of promoting, marketing, and implementing the
Accessory Dwelling Unit program. The Moderate -Density Residential (R-15) zone
district is designated to provide areas for long term residential purposes with customary
accessory uses. This conditional use request for the approval of an Accessory Dwelling
Unit within a duplex is consistent with the intent, philosophy, and policies of the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan, and complies with the intent of the Moderate -Density
Residential (R-15) zone district.
B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances
the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development;
RESPONSE: The Cemetery Lane neighborhood contains a mixture of detached
single-family and duplex residences exhibiting a wide variety of contemporary
architectural styles. A number of the existing residences in the area are being expanded,
renovated or reconstructed. In addition, several new residences have been built on
previously vacant lots. The proposed, remodeled and expanded half -duplex is consistent
and compatible with surrounding land uses, densities, and neighborhood character.
The parcel is located at the intersection of Cemetery Lane and Silverking Drive along the
Cemetery Lane RFTA bus route. The Messiah Lutheran Church is one and one-half
- blocks to the east on Mountain View Drive. A number of parks and trails are within
walking or biking distance of the site: the Aspen Municipal Golf Course, Red Butte Park,
Stein Park and Rio Grande Trail, Sunnyside Trail, Red Butte Cemetery and the Wildlife
Preservation Zone along Castle Creek.
A number of local, working residents, both owners and renters, live in the Cemetery Lane
neighborhood. At the same time, the area is gaining popularity among second -home
buyers and investors. The proposal to remodel and expand the existing residence is
consistent with what is occurring elsewhere; however, with the inclusion of an Accessory
Dwelling Unit, a new opportunity may be created for a local employee to reside and
enliven the neighborhood.
C. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional
use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and
vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations, and odor on
surrounding properties;
RESPONSE: The 685 s.f. (635 s.f. net liveable) studio Accessory Dwelling Unit is
contained within the below -grade level of the proposed, expanded and remodeled, half-
dupliex. It should not create a visual impact from either Cemetery Lane or Silverking
Drive. The unit is designed to have a separate covered entry and internal access stairway.
A designated, off-street parking space for the studio ADU is provided perpendicular to
the private, residential driveway. Automobile trips should be minimized since the site is
directly on the RFTA Cemetery bus route. It is also within walking and biking distance
of downtown, community services, a church, and several parks and trails. The approval
of an Accessory Dwelling Unit within the proposed, enlarged and redesigned, half -duplex
should not adversely impact the surrounding properties in terms of trash, service delivery,
noise, vibrations and/or odor.
D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use
including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire
protection, emergency, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools;
RESPONSE: There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the proposed
Accessory Dwelling Unit.
E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for
increased employees generated by the conditional use;
RESPONSE: The applicant is creating an ADU in accordance with Section 26.100.050,
Exemptions, for the remodeling or expansion of a residence into a duplex and the
Restrictive Covenant for Unit B, 1425 Silverking, a Condominium.
Pursuant to Section 26.40.090, Accessory dwelling units, the unit shall be deed restricted,
meet the Housing Authority's guidelines for resident occupied units and shall be limited
to rental periods of not less than six (6) months in duration. Owners of the principal
residence shall have the right to place a qualified employee or employees of his or her
choosing in the Accessory Dwelling Unit.
F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all applicable requirements of this title;
RESPONSE: The proposed conditional use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit within a
condominiumized, half -duplex is in conformance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive
Plan and complies with all other applicable requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: Community Development staff recommends that the
conditional use for the proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) at 1425 Silverking
Drive, Unit B, in the City of Aspen be approved with the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicant shall:
a. verify with the Housing Office that the floor area of the Accessory Dwelling Unit is
a minimum of six hundred (600) square feet as per Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c)(2);
b. verify with the Housing Office that the ADU will contain a kitchen having a
minimum of a two -burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6-cubic foot
refrigerator plus freezer;
c. upon approval of the deed restriction by the Housing Office, the applicant shall
record the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office and
provide proof of recordation to the Community Development Department. The
deed restriction shall state that the Accessory Dwelling Unit meets the housing
guidelines for such units, meets the definition of Resident Occupied Unit, and if
rented, the unit shall be rented for periods of six (6) months or longer;
d. clearly identify the Accessory Dwelling Unit on building permit plans as a separate
studio unit having a private, exterior entrance and being in compliance with 1994
U.B.C. Sound Transmission Guidelines (Appendix Chapter 12, Division II,
Section 1208).
e. provide one, off-street parking space on -site for the ADU.
f. submit plans pursuant to Chapter 26.58, Residential Review Standards to
Community Development for review and approval;
g. provide a drainage plan to confirm that the historic surface run-off shall be
maintained on -site;
h. submit a landscape plan to the Parks Department for review and approval;
i. apply for a tree removal permit two (2) weeks prior to the issuance of a building
permit if any trees are to be removed. The required mitigation for the removal of
any of these trees shall be as per Section 15.04.450 of the municipal code.
2. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Community Development
Department shall inspect the Accessory Dwelling Unit to determine compliance with
the conditions of approval.
3. The applicant shall consult with City departments regarding the following:
a. City Engineering for design considerations and any development within public
rights -of -way;
b. Parks Department for tree removal, landscaping, and vegetative species;
c. City Streets Department for any work or development, including landscaping,
within public rights -of -way.
4. Any new surface utility needs including pedestals must be installed on -site.
5. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be
formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way.
6. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during
public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and
considered conditions of appro\ al, unless otherwise amended by other conditions.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS: Planning and Zoning Commission may
approve the conditions above, approve additional conditions or disapprove the
conditional use for the Accessory Dwelling Unit.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the conditional use for the Accessory
Dwelling Unit at 1425 Silverking Drive, Unit B, with the conditions as outlined in the
Community Development Department memo dated August 6, 1996."
EXHIB ITS :
"A" - Conditional Use Application
"B" - Referral Comments
"C" - Restrictive Covenant
"D" - Section 26.100.050, Exemptions, Land Use Regulations
; I, ) L� �x. 1
Mtn Wt -
I
1) Pruject Name u Exhibit A
2) Fr aj ect Location ciq 9 r c v)
(indi sate street address, lot & block nL=ber, legal • -- cn where
4 p t -j r ap r: iat e)
3) Present Zoning ! `� 4) Lot Size qj
5) APPI i rnnt I Name, Address& Mcne # ( 1 r G IC vl
999 U- rmut C� v-�:c 1 �aS �35
tive's Name Adchvss & Pbcne Ic u
GQ 9 C,� G: l ( a S- 3S�
7) Type of Appli.catJon (please cbeck.all that apply) :
v cad i t:c l Use Cm�tqal SPA 7 giston c Dev.
_ Special Review
8040 CreerL i ne
Final SPA
•• • •.• ..• .. =-..+•• —
Des=�t.icn of Fps'• i� (ember and, tie of end ; i nq ;
AITIM
md.matte sq. ft. ; rnmt�er of any rinusapozwals granted to the
F�rtY) -
-1 <�
tic7r# ti cn of DevelCtMeIt APPI I C -' '; Cn
v.
—.. - . .....�.... �. c.. ..•. . •. -
This proposed A.D.U. is part of an expansion/remodel plan for 999 Cemetery
Lane, located on the Southeast corner of the intersection of Silver King Drive
and Cemetery Lane.
The proposed A.D.U. is a sub -grade unit of @ 635 square feet. The entrance
is located on the Silver King ( North Elevation ) side of the building immediately
adjacent to the off-street parking for the unit. All public utilities are in place
on both Silver King and Cemetery Lane.
The unit has complete bath, kitchen and washer/dryer facilties. Heat is
provided by a seperate zone of the main unit's hydronic radiant floor heating
system, with water and electric service also being provided from the main unit's
supply. Natural light and emergency egress is provided by windows on the North and
East walls, with additional light coming from windows in the stairwell and on the
South wall.
. At the request of the intended
tenent, there is a lockable door proposed in the wall between the A.D.U. kitchen
and the downstairs study.
The surrounding neighborhood is made up of single family and duplex residences,
with a mix of permanent residents and second -home owners, with other rental units
and A.D.U.'s nearby.
ENT
ION LINE T.B.M. 78<
iNIUM �� / ® FROM 1975
:CTION 7.41 ASPEN AER
at v:
L.C.E. .UNIT B \ ~ ems• ti
/ F �
U• r �y� RV
ED DRIVEWAY C
PATIO
.
13 1 2
GRAVEL
•' �" 2 STORY `i / PARKING
MW FRAME /
UNIT B SEE BOUNDA-
• \ �. C . E . UN IT -8 GRANT OF RE
BOOK 733 �=
5
33 I \ 1�
GARAGE
� e
CONCRETE PAD TRASH.
SHED
�g • � / ems• �
bi
L.C.E. UNIT A 59 �O QO PYRAMID VIEW CONDOMINIUMS
� MUTUAL CONSENT
USAGE DIVISION LINE
(SEE CONDOMINIUM
DECLARATION. SECTION 7.4)
EXHIBIT "A"
1. Taxes for the year 1996 not yet due or payable.,
2. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or remove his ore
therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the
premises hereby granted as reserved in United States Patent recorded
October 27, 1892 in Book 55 at Page 33.
3. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of
subject property recorded September 5, 1968 in Plat Book 3 at Page
308 and Condominium Map recorded_ 1996 in Plat Book $3 at
Page.
4. All matters set forth in Boundary Agreement and Grant of Revocable
License, recorded December 7, 1993 in Book 733 at Page 971.
5. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations, easements, restrictions
and assessments as set forth in the Condominium Declaration for
1425 Silverking, a Condominium, recorded May;A, 1996 as Reception
No._31,13�o deleting therefrom any restrictions indicating
preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color,
religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin.
393138 O5/29/96 O4:19R PG 2 OF
REC
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER 11.00 U5C20 UI�C
WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED, made this 23 day of MAY
1996, between ROBERT W. HUGHES AND MARILYN A. HUGHES
OF THE COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF CO
GRANTOR, AND
SALLIE G. PICKUS
GRANTEE
whose legal address is :
999 CE14ETERY LANE, ASPEN, CO, 81611
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF CO
WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars
and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
x
which is hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, sold and
1
W Q
conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and
yconfirm
unto the grantee, his Heirs and assigns.forever, all the real
4
property together with improvements, if any, situate and lying and being in
the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows:
O
`yl
CONDOMINIUI.1 UNIT B, 1425 SILVERKING, a condominium according to the
U (J\
Condominium Map thereof recorded May " 0 , 1996 in Plat Book at Page
and as defined and described in the Condominium Declar tion for
Q
1425 Silverking recorded May a 1996 as Reception
TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances
thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and
n
reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the
lam-
estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor
r0
either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with
the hereditaments and appurtenances.
�Z ��
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described,
\
with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever.
< EL
And the Grantor, for himself, his heirs and personal representatives, does
u
O
2f�
covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, his heirs and
Q
assigns, that at the time of the ensealing delivery of the presents, he is
rr
well seized of the remises above conveyed, has perfect,
P y good sure,
absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple,
mand
has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain,
sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the
same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales,
liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind
>
or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached
'4
hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
U
The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained.
c
premises in the quiet nd peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs
o
a 1 and every person or persons lawfully claiming the
and assigns, agaLthe
le o a y tarr of. The singular number shall include the plural,
pl 1 th sa , and the use of gender shall be applicable to all
rt
dens
iR
1-4
Q
�
ERT W. HUGHES MAR YN A. HI, HES
N
co 4-
M N
f•) r0
Q` L
.STATE OF COLORADO )
COUNTY OF PITKIN ) as.
�Jyl"j
l�(Z fo egoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 23rd day of May
90 by ROBER'P w. HUGIIGS and MARILYN A. IIUGHES
Ja
3rU:LTGS
r1 J' my hand and official sealtr
.,
L''tnIjCommission expires: Notary P is
J UL eif ' Jb uLf : U&-'r`l HbFJEII HULISlrg(r OF l_
MLMORA NDUM
TO: Bob Nevins, Community Development Dept,
FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Offioe
GATE: July 22, 1996
RE: Pickus Review for Accessory Dwelling Unit at 999 Cemetery Lane
Parcel ID No.
The applicant is seeking approval for a subgrade, 635 square foot ADU.
Accessory dwelling units shall oontain not less than three hundred (300) square feet of allowable floor
area and not more than $even hundred (700) square feet of allowable floor area. The unit shall be
deed restricted, meeting the housing authar9f<jr's guidelines. for resident occupied units and shall be
limited to rental periods of not leas than sx (6) months in duration. Owners of the principal residence
shall have the right to place a qualiNd employee or employees of his or her choosing in the
aocessory dwelling unit.
The kitchen must be built to the following specifications:
Kitchen - For Accessory Dwo4ing Units and Caretaker Dwelling Units, a minimum of a twu-bumer
stove with oven, atandard sink, and a 6-cubic %ot refrigerator plus freezer.
RECi�}�IIAI'IEt11DA'TION: Staff recommends approval should the following wnditions be
met:
A the kitchen falls within the definition stated above;
A a deed restriction be recorded before a building permit is issued (this form must be
obtained in the Housing Office); and
inspection of the unit by the Housing Office* before Certification of Occupancy
approval.
meter IVic#us.adu
Exhibit C
393137 05/29/96 04:18P PG 1 OF 1 REC DOC UCC
SILVIA DAVIS GITKIN COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER 6.00
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT
Unit B, 1425 Sdverking, a Condominium
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned owners of Unit B,
1425 Silveridng, a Condominium accordin to the Condominium Declaration therefor recorded
May, 1996; as Reception No. and as shown an described in the
Condominium Plat thereof recorded Ma 1996 as and
No in Plat
Boo at Page , all recording reference being to the real property records of Pitkin
County, Colorado ("Unit B"), do hereby publish and declare that the following is and shall be a
covenant that nuns with the title to Unit B and shall be a burden thereupon and upon the owner(s)
at anytime thereof for the specific benefit of the City of Aspen, to wit:
At the time of any expansion of Unit B, the owner thereof shall
apply for, dilligently seek from the City of Aspen conditional use
approval for and thereafter construct and install as an appurtenance
to Unit 2 an Accessory Dwelling Unit meeting the minimum
Q requirements of the Land Use Regulations of the City of Aspen. In
the event the owner of Unit 2 fails to obtain approval for such
Accessory Dwelling Unit, then the Owner shall pay to the City of
Aspen (or, as the case may be applicable, its affordable housing
4 designee), as a condition to obtaining a building permit for such
expansion, an Affordable Housing Impact Fee which shall be
calculated on the basis of the square footage of Unit B at the time
of its creation.
IN WII'NESSPHEREOF this Restrictive Covenant has ` made, published and
declared as of thg23- day of May, 1996.
W
JL-A't
Rbbert W. Hughes
STATE OF COLORADO ) yn A. jfughes
)ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ,�� day of May, 1996 by
Robert W. Hughes and Marilyn A. Hughes.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires
25
Notary Public
y�PU3LtG/
Exhibit D
C. Unallocated surplus allotments. If, on May 31, unallocated development allotments remain unused
they shall automatically be treated as "surplus" allotments and be added to the pool of allotments available
in successive years [see formula, Section 26.100.040(A)(3)]. This automatic carryover provision notwithstanding,
the City Council, following a public hearing for which notice has been given pursuant to Section 26.52.060
(E)(3)(a), shall be authorized to deny the carryover of allotments and to delete any remaining surplus allotments.
In making its decision, the City Council shall consider the following
1. The community's growth rate over the preceding five-year period;
2. The ability of the community to absorb the growth that could result from a proposed development
that is granted the unallocated allotments, including issues of scale, infrastructure capacity and community
character, and
3. The expected impact from approved developments that have already obtained allotments.or exemptions,
but that have not yet been built. (Ord. No. 9-1993, § 2; Ord. No. 54-1994: Code § 8-104)
26.100.050 Exemptions.
Several types of development are eligible for exemption from the residential and tourist accommodations
growth management competition and scoring procedures of this article. Some types of exempt development
are deducted from the pool of annual development allotments and metro area development ceilings; others
are not. This section describes the types of development that are exempt from growth management competition
and scoring. The provisions are organized in terms of the decision -making entity with responsibility and authority
for considering exemption requests. The regulations also describe whether exemptions are to be deducted from
the pool of annual development allotments and the metro area development ceilings. See "Allocation Procedures
for Exempt Development," Section 26.100.060(B).
A. Exemption by Community Development Director.
1. General.
a. Timing of exemption request No development shall be considered for an exemption by the Community
Development Director until a complete building permit application has been submitted pursuant to Section
26.52.070.
b. Delayed reconstruction of demolished dwelling, hotel and lodge units. An exemption request that
includes a request for an extension of the three-year deadline on reconstruction of demolished dwelling, hotel
and lodge units shall be accompanied by an improvements survey of the structure. No demolition shall occur
until the Community Development Director has verified the improvements survey.
2. Community Development Director exemptions that are not deducted from the pool of annual development
allotments or from the metro area development ceilings. The following exemptions shall not be deducted from
the respective annual development allotment established pursuant to Section 26.100.040 or from the metro
area development ceilings established pursuant to Section 26.100.030.
a. Remodeling, restoration, or reconstruction of existing buildings.
(1) Remodeling, restoration or reconstruction of existing lodge or multi -family buildings. The remodeling,
restoration or reconstruction of an existing lodge or multi -family building shall be exempt from the growth
management competition and scoring procedures, provided that it does not create additional dwelling, hotel
or lodge units or involve a change of use. No bandit unit shall be remodeled, restored or reconstructed unless
it has first been legalized pursuant to Section 26.40.090.
(2) Reconstruction of demolished dwelling, hotel and lodge units The reconstruction of demolished
dwelling, hotel and lodge units shall be exempt from the
growth in accordance with the following standards: management competition and scoring �,
(a) An applicant may propose to demolish and then delay the reconstruction of existing dwell'
or lodge units. g� hotel
(b) The applicant shall verify, by a letter submitted to and approved by the Community Development
Director, the number of existing legal units on the property prior to demolition and shall agree that reconstrucnon
will occur pursuant to the terms of this section
(c) Reconstruction shall occur within five (5) years of demolition, unless an extension of this deadline
is granted by the City Council for good cause.
(d) Any building that is demolished shall be limited to 1emnst uction on the same parcel or on a contiguous
parcel owned by the applicant, unless it is determined that reconstruction shall be permitted off -site pursuant
to Section 26.48.030.
(3) Replacement of structures listed on inventory of historic structures. A structure included on
the
inventory of historic structures that is neither an historic landmark nor located within an Historic 4ve av
District may be removed from a property and relocated elsewhere within the City of Aspen and need not be
demolished in order for a replacement structure on its original site to be exempted from the growth management
competition and scoring procedures, provided that the stricture is designated as an historic landmark ;n :ts
new location and all necessary development approvals are obtained from HPC and the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
(4) Replacement of demolished multi -family, residential units. Replacement of demolished multi -family,
residential units shall be subject to the requirements of the Housing Replacement Program.
(5) Remodeling, restoration or expansion of existing single-family or duplex dwellings. The remodeling,
restoration or expansion of existing single-family or duplex dwelling
P �s shall be exempt from the growth management
competition and scoring procedures.
b. Historic landmarks. The change of use of an historic landmark that does not increase the building's
existing -11oor area ratio shall be exempt from the
'rowth management competition and scoring procedure
c. Detached single-family or duplex dwelling unit. The construction of one or two detached residential
units ,or a duplex dwelling on a lot that was subdivided or was a regally described parcel prior to November
14, 1977, that complies with the provisions of Section 26.88.040(A)(5) or the replacement after demolition
of one or two detached residential units or a duplex dwelling, or the remodel or expansion of a single family
dwelling into a duplex dwelling. This exemption shall not be applied to any lot for which any other development
allotment is currently being sought or is approved. This exemption shall only apply if the following standards
are met.
(1) Single-family. In order to qualify for a single-family exemption the applicant shall have three options:
(a) providing an accessory dwelling unit;
(b) paying the applicable affordable housing impact fee: or
(c) recording a resident -occupancy deed restriction on the single-family dwelling unit being constructed.
(2) Duplex. In order to qualify for a duplex exemption, the applicant shall have four options:
(a) providing one free market dwelling unit and one deed restricted, resident- occupied dwellin unit
with a minimum floor area of one thousand five hundred (l � ()0) square feet; g
(b) providing two free market dwelling units and one accessory dwelling unit with a minimum floor
area of six hundred (600) square feet;
(c) providing two deed restricted, resident -occupied dwelling units: or
(d) Paying the applicable affordable housing impact fee.
MEMORANDUM
To: Bob Nevins, City Planner
Thru: Nick Adeh, City Engineer
From: Ross C. Soderstrom, Project Engineer gC j
Date: July 30, 1996
Re: Pickus Conditional Use Review for an ADU
(1425 Silverking Drive, Unit B, [a.k.a. 999 Cemetery Lane]; 1425 Silverking, A Condominium;
formerly: Lot 1, West Aspen Subdivision, Filing No. 2, City of Aspen, CO)
After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit I have the following
comments:
1. Driveway & Parking: The maximum permitted driveway width for this zone
district and for a 60 ft frontage lot dimension is eighteen (18) ft of width for the length of a double
driveway extending from the edge of pavement to the right-of-way line. The existing driveway is.
approximately sixteen (16) ft wide on the Unit B (present applicant) side and adjoining a twelve
(12) ft wide section on the Unit A side of the Mutual Consent Division Line. As such the driveway
should not be widened from its existing width from the edge of street pavement to the right-of-way
line at the northwesterly property line.
No driveway access should be permitted along the Cemetery Lane frontage due to the proximity to
the intersection of Cemetery Ln., Silverking Dr. and Snowbunny Ln. The existing landscaping
obstructs visibility of the existing stop sign on Silverking Dr. thus either regular pruning of the
hedge or other landscaping should be planted to provide adequate visibility of the sign and site
distance to the south on Cemetery Lane. No proposed site nor landscaping plans were provided in
the application materials for our review.
The parking configuration will need to be shown on the final improvement plans submitted for the
building permit. application.
2. Trash & Utility -Areas: The submitted site plan does not indicate locations for these
facilities although water and electric utility meters and service connection points need to be
accessible to service personnel in the completed project and not obstructed by garbage or recycling
containers, other structures or landscaping. Any new surface utilities requiring a pedestal or other
above ground equipment must be installed on an easement provided by the property owner and not
located in the public rights -of -way. The existing easements appear adequate in width on each side
1 OF 2
DRCM 1696.DOC
Memo - Pickus Conditional Use Review for an ADU
of the property. All existing and any new easements for utilities shall be shown on the final
improvement plans and any new easements must be recorded prior to issuance of the building
permit.
3. Site Drainage: The new development cannot release more than historic (pre -
development) storm run-off flows from the site and any increase in historic storm run-off flows
must be first routed and detained on the site. A drainage report and plan must be included in the
final improvement plans submitted for the building permit. (No drainage plan shown on submitted
application drawings.)
4. Sidewalk Area: The property owner will be required. to execute and record, prior to
building permit issuance, an agreement to construct curb, gutter and sidewalks when needed for the
neighborhood along the Silverking Drive and Cemetery Lane frontages, although none is planned at
this time. A five ft. (5 ft.) sidewalk (or pedestrian area) should remain unobstructed by
improvements including fences, landscape boulders, vegetation; e.g. any new trees must be located
to provide space for and alignment of the future sidewalk with the neighboring sidewalk routes and
grades to either side. The pedestrian usable space must be shown on the final development plan.
5. Encroachments: The proposed easterly walkway leading to Cemetery Lane must be
placed not higher than existing grade so that it does not protrude above the surrounding ground
level in the right-of-way. Street maintenance and snow removal operations may damage or remove
improvements and landscaping placed or extending into the public rights -of -way. The owner is
responsible for construction and maintenance of all landscaping ' improvements, with prior City
approval, to the edge of pavement.
6. Improvement Survey: A proper improvement survey plat per current 38-51 C.R.S.
and as amended by city code requirements needs to be submitted in the building permit application.
7. Improvement Districts: The property owner will be required to agree to join any
future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent
public rights -of -way. The agreement shall be executed and recorded prior to issuance of the
building permit for the project.
8. Record Drawings: Prior to C.O. issuance the building permit applicant will be required
to submit to the Aspen/Pitkin County Data Processing Dept. as-builts drawings for the project
showing the property lines, building footprint, easements, encroachments, entry points for utilities
entering the property boundaries and any other improvements.
2 OF 2
DRCM 1696.DOC
Attachment 8
County of Pitkin }
}
State of Colorado }
I,
AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT
SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS
SECTION 6-205.E.
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements
pursuant to Section'6-205.E. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in
the following manner:
vox not d kit v e r IV,
1. By rof noti%, a copy of which is attached hereto,
.,i-a 44&phy� ��, I gcWwts
'1 to all owners
of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on
the day of a 199 (which is days
prior to the public hearing date of $ ).
2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject
property (as it could be seen from the nearest public
way) and that the said sign was posted and visible
continuously from the 34-1 day of D , 199
to the t_ day of 199�. (Must be
posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing
date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached
hereto.
Signature
(Attach photograph here) Signed before me this 1; day of
199L. by
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My Commission ex Tres : f-��
stkga:�L Lp-:Y"
Notary Public
g q
14 � O
iVIA
���
l vv't t7 VA
Ck VI
r1 N M1
CQI 1Lt i;` tam O t\
1'.izcot
i i qO 15,
}. c r ro, V 15t, 1)r aid
11 790 % -c-, Y" ro\ u I' _, t� - B r 1, 0
-) Gar/ i Oy,j e �,, J j
0r r t C- T � J r In Q 61 u
Tr u It
14
q Let,
3- C -.Q- v-,-, cz Lc,%, 11 -Q--
C f- j
Q-
-�z Y, -C u c --c"-
'13 qo
12,9 S-
G - 0
13'7 5 s "
s c � Y,
1-360 � u
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I have complied with the notice requirements of Section 6-
205 (E) (3) (C) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations of'I the Aspen
Municipal Code by mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached
hereto by4-V-- -a% al!mt ge to all owners of
property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property
on
t
STATE OF COLORADO )
) SS
COUNTY OF PITRIN )
The foregoing Affidavit of mailing was signed before me this
day of .
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: 4 -/I --If 1-7
tkazL aq . .
Notary Public
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: PICKUS CONDITIONAL USE FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August 6, 1996 at a
meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities
Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Sallie
Pickus, requesting approval for a sub -grade studio accessory dwelling unit of approximately 635
square feet as part of an expansion/remodel plan. The property is located at 1425 Silverking, Unit
B. For further information, contact Bob Nevins at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development
Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5102.
s/Sara Garton, Chair
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on July 20, 1996
City of Aspen Account
-1
KURT G. 1131RESNIT Z
1650 HomESTAKE DRIVE
ASPEN, COILORADO 81611
o
ol Ps()
6-0 czi-h
Nv\
QT 5,o H
all
UVI
G6peo,llvl�w* (I19g6
1
JANETGUTHRIE
P. 0. Box 505
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612
--77
Ake,
4,
l
N
in 00
O
>04
m O
THE -
J� CH
421A ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER/ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 920-1079
City of Aspen
Planning and Zoning Committee
Aspen Colorado August 6, 1996
This letter constitutes my formal opposition to the application by the Hughes' at 1425 Silver King Drive
to increase the usage of their property by the addition of an accessory unit.
I am a homeowner at 875 Chatfield Road, Aspen Colorado.
I hereby assign any Proxy vote to Andy Disabatino.
Sincerely,
Linda Niven.
i
r-I-FHE -'H
1'
421A ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER/ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and -Zoning Commission
THRU: Dave Michaelson, Deputy Director X, K ,
FROM: Bob Nevins, City Planner
RE: Colas Investments Conditional Use Review For Two Accessory Dwelling Units;
and Stream Margin Review
Parcel I.D. No. 2737-074-00-028
DATE: August 6, 1996
SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to construct two, detached single-family residences on a
vacant 13,155 s.f. lot within the R-6 zone district. As part of the development application, the
applicant is requesting: 1) conditional use approval for two, studio accessory dwelling units
(ADUs), each containing approximately 390 s.f. of net livable area and; 2) stream margin review
approval for the development of two residences within 100 feet of the high water line of the
Roaring Fork River.
The application was tabled by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing on
July 2, 1996. The Commission requested that additional information and clarification regarding the
following .issues be provided: a) overall project density, building mass, access, and off-street
parking within the site; b) fire protection and safety; c) adequate easements for construction, ditch
maintenance, and landscaping and; d) provision for a pedestrian and bicycle trail easement along
the Roaring Fork River.
The applicant's addendum packet is attached as Exhibit A. Referral comments from Engineering
and Parks are included as Exhibit B.
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use for the two studio, accessory dwelling units and
the stream margin review for the proposed development with conditions.
APPLICANT: Colas Investments, represented by Mr. Jan Derrington of Cunniffe Architects
LOCATION: Parcels A and B, are situated in the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7 and in the
NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 18, all in Township 10 South, RaVge 84 West of the sixth
` principal meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado. The parcels are located off Park Avenue at Regent
Street and adjacent to Garrish Park in the City of Aspen. I
ZONING:. Medium -Density Residential (R-6/PUD)
LOT SIZE: 13,155 square feet (0.302 acres)
PROPOSED LAND USE: Two, detached single-family residences with two accessory dwelling
units (ADU's). Two, detached residential dwellings are permitted uses on lots of 9,000 s.f. or
greater within the R-6 zone district.
FAR: Two detached residential dwellings on a lot of 9,000 s.f. or greater shall not exceed the floor
area allowed for one duplex. Lots of 9,000-15,000 s.f. are permitted 4,080 s.f. of allowable floor
area, plus 6 s.f. of floor area for each additional 100 s.f. of lot area. Slopes over greater than 30%
shall be excluded from calculating allowable floor area. The total reduction in FAR attributable to
slope reduction shall not exceed 25%. Based on this criteria, the total allowable FAR for two
detached residences (or duplex) on the property is estimated to be approximatel y.. 4) � 9"
REVIEW REVIEW PROCESS: Accessory dwelling units require conditional use approval by the Planning.
and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. It is a one-step review and may be consolidated w
ith
an other development application. Stream margin review is a one-step process at a meeting before
Y p
the Planning and Zoning Commission. It is not a public hearing and may be consolidated with any
other development applications.
BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Section 26.28.040(B)(3), two detached residential dwellings are a
permitted use on a lot 9,000 s.f. or greater within the R-6 zone district. The project has previously
been reviewed by the Design Review Architectural Committee (DRAG) November 9, 1995 and
May 9, 1996. The Committee's major concerns were: 1) the buildings orientation to the street;
2) the massing and scale within the public viewplane; 3) the setback along Garnish Park; 4) the
"no window" zone; and 5) an interior entrance from the ADU into the living room of the primary
residence. The applicant modified the plans in accordance with the DRAC comments and received
Staff Residential Design approval on June 17,1996.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: The additional comments from Engineering and Parks are
included as Exhibit B.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Conditional Use Review: The purpose of the Medium -Density Residential (R-6) zone district is to
provide areas for long term residential purposes with customary accessory uses. The development
proposal to construct two detached single-family residences and two, studio accessory dwelling
units on the residential lot complies with the intent. of the R-6 zone.
Pursuant to Section 26.60.0401 Standards applicable to all conditional uses, the applicant meets the
standards: A) it is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan; B) it is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate
vicinity and surrounding land uses; D) there are adequate public facilities and services to serve the
conditional use; and E) affordable housing is being supplied by the creation of two studio ADU's.
The applicant has revised the plans and provided additional information to adequately address
conditional use standards C and F:
Standard C. Commission members were concerned about vehicular circulation, parking, trash,
service, delivery, and emergency access. The applicant has addressed these concerns as follows:
1) A 13' -6" access driveway is provided to serve both residences. It provides adequate width for
fire truck, delivery, and residential vehicular access
2) To ensure fire protection and safety for the residents and neighbors, both buildings will- be fully
sprinkled; a turf -block area is provided in front of Unit 1 as a turn -around area for fire trucks
emergency vehicles and deliveries; the deck overhanging the access drive from Unit 1 will be
eliminated to allow sufficient emergency vehicle clearance ands the access drive shall �be
posted as a fire lane and kept clear of parked vehicles and snow at all times.
3) The driveway intersection at Park Avenue will be reconstructed in compliance with City
Engineering Department Standards.
4) There are sufficient areas for vehicles to ingress and egress the garages and for emergency
trucks to turn -around.
5) The two ADU parking spaces meet the project's off-street parking requirements. The spaces
do not interfere with the accessibility of the Unit 2 garage or emergency vehicles.
Standard F. The revised submittal complies with the applicable requirements of the land use
regulations with the following conditions:
1) A construction and landscape easement agreement needs to be obtained from the adjoining
property owners and recorded with the County Clerk prior to the issuance of building permits.
2) City Engineering requests that the access easement be created as an "outlot" that is unrestricted
with no right for any development on the easement which restricts the access intent and that
the intent is to convey a clear twenty foot travel access.
3) Engineering is to review and approve the maintenance agreement and encroachment licenses
prior to their execution, and the new access "outlot" easement
The two, studio ADU's are located above the garages with very good natural light, ventilation and
views. The units have separate, private, covered exterior entries. The Unit 2 ADU has an exterior
deck. The studios each contain approximately 385 s.f. of net livable area. An interior doorway
links the accessory dwelling units to the living area of the main residences. One surface, off-street
parking space per ADU is provided.
3
Stream Margin Review: Stream margins are areas located within one hundred 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 feet from the high water line of the
Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or within a flood hazard area (stream margin).
Development in these areas shall be 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 features.
The property is located within one hundred feet, measured horizontally, from the Roaring Fork
River. However, measured vertically, the site is considerably above the river and the flood hazard
zone. Pursuant to Section 26.68.040, Stream margin, the development proposal complies with
Standards (A) and (B)(1,2,3,4,5,7,9,10,11,12,13, and 14). Standards (B)(6 and 8) are not applicable
to this application.
In evaluating this development proposal, the fifteen foot setback from the top -of -slope and the
progressive height limit defined by a forty-five degree angle drawn at ground level from the top -of -
slope are critical stream margin considerations. As shown by the site section (see Exhibit A, sheet
A5.1, A- Building Section at Unit 1), the proposed residences are in compliance with these review
standards.
Trail corridors and linkages are important factors to be evaluated as part of the stream margin
review. The corridor along the Roaring Fork River between Herron Park and East Cooper Avenue
is identified as critical link in the Aspen Area trail system. Parks Department is requesting the
applicant to grant trail easement from the centerline of the Riverside ditch south to the lower
property boundary for future trail construction. Flexibility is needed to properly plan a trail
alignment through this area due to topography and other factors. The proposed trail is below the
residences and should not result in an adverse impact. The trail easement would not affect the
allowable FAR permitted on the parcel.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional use approval for two studio,
accessory dwelling units and the stream margin review with the following conditions:
Accessory Dwelling Units -Conditional Use Approval
1. The applicant shall submit to Engineering for review and approval, prior to the issuance of
any development orders, the following:
a) A construction and landscape easement agreement with the adjoining property owners
to be recorded with the County Clerk.
10
b) The access easement shall be created as an "outlot" that is unrestricted with no right for
any development on the easement which restricts the access intent and that the intent is
to convey a clear twenty foot travel access.
c) The maintenance agreement and encroachment licenses shall be submitted prior to their
execution, and the new access- "outtlot" easement
ILUIVd) A complete se -improvement and topographic survey
e) The Fire Marshall to review and approve the residential interior sprinkler systems
and the final access drive and turn -around with respect to emergency access and
fire safety.
f) The on -site parking and vehicular access requirements meet City design standards.
2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall comply with the following:
a) The owner shall submit the appropriate deed restrictions to the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Office for approval. Upon approval of the deed restrictions by the Housing.
Office, the applicant shall record the- deed restrictions with the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorders Office with proof of recordation submitted to the Planning Department. The
deed restriction shall state that the accessory units meet the housing guidelines for such
units, meet the.definition of Resident Occupied Units, and if rented, shall be'rented for
periods of six (6) months or longer.
b) Kitchen plans shall be verified by the Housing Office to ensure compliance with
specifications for kitchens in ADUs.
c) The ADUs shall be clearly identified as a separate dwelling units on building permit
plans and shall comply with the 1994 U.B.C. Sound Transmission Control Guidelines.
d) A landscaping plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Parks Department.
Tree removal permits shall be required for the removal or relocation of any tree greater
than six inch caliper.
3. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Planning Department shall inspect the
accessory dwelling units to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval.
4. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public
meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered
conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions.
Stream Margin Review Approval , d CA -
The trail easement shall be the area from the
centerline of the Riverside ditch south to the lower property boundary. The trail easement
shall be described and shown on the final plat. The easement shall be recorded with the
County Clerk and Recorder. The trail easement will not affect the allowable FAR permitted
on the parcel.
9
2. The building envelopes for the two residences shall be clearly shown on the final plat.
3. No vegetation shall be manipulated outside of the building envelope, and the envelope
boundary along the Roaring Fork River shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any
building permits.
4. Silt fencing shall be used during construction to prevent runoff from disturbed soils from
entering the river. Revegetation is required for any disturbed soil on the site.
5. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public
meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered
conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS: Combined development applications requesting
conditional use and stream margin review may be considered and approved separately or together.
Planning and Zoning Commission may approve the conditions above, approve additional
conditions or disapprove the conditional use and stream margin review for the two, detached single-
family residences proposed by Colas Investments.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the conditional use for two studio, accessory
dwelling units and the stream margin review for the two, detached single-family residences
proposed on PareeloffParkAve-nuea-t-RegenStTee-twith the conditions outlined in the
Community Development Office Memorandum dated August 6, 1996".,,
Exhibits:
"A" - Addendum to Conditional Use and Stream Margin Review Application
"B" - Referral Comments
0
July 26, 1996
Bob Nevins
Community Development Department
City of Aspen
130 South Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
cxrJID1r A
NEU-
r .1•; -
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
�..
INTERIORS
re: Two Detached Single Family Residences for Colas Investments, LLC
Parcel A off Park Avenue at Regent Street, Aspen, Colorado
Dear Bob,
In furtherance of the July 2, 1996 Public Hearing for Conditional Use (ADU) and Stream Margin
Review, we are herewith submitting the following revisions for consideration -by the Aspen
Planning & Zoning Commission at the continued Public Hearing on August 6, 1996.
A. Conditional Use (ADU)
1. We expect Mr. Sylvio Tabet to be in attendance at the continued hearing to
discuss the application directly with P&Z. We have spoken with the adjoining land
owners; Dieter Bibbig, Arne Marthinsson and Magne Nostdahl; all of whom have
expressed support for this proposed land use and who also plan to attend the
continued hearing. We wish to emphasize that the intent of the ADU's is to
provide affordable housing within close proximity to city bus routes and easy
walking distance to flown. All of the people who will be impacted feel that
affordable housing is appropriate for this property. By having local people living
there who have regular jobs and possibly provide maintenance for these
dwellings, for a stipend or reduced rent, the Owner has the benefit of added
security against burglary or vandalism. This is a win/win scenario and is quite
compatible with the existing zoning and demography of the neighborhood.
2. With regard to access/egress for automobiles and fire trucks, we have
superimposed circulation diagrams on the site plan which has been modified for
easier maneuvering. (See attached Exhibits A-1 through A-6) We have shown
these documents to the adjoining land owners who have expressed willingness to
enter into a common boundary landscaping and maintenance agreement along
the North boundary and encroachment licenses for the garage along the East
.boundary. We have also met with the Fire Marshall, Ed Van Walraven, who finds
tM-.e project to be acceptable with the proposed modifications listed below:
a. Both of the residences (and ADU's) will have automatic fire sprinkleIr systems,
that comply with NFPA 13.D
b. The grass block lawn area will have a compacted road base similar to the
asphalt paved driveway.
c. There will be no balconies projecting beyond the exterior walls of the ADU
for Unit # 1 on the North or East elevations. There will be no such restrictions
for the ADU for Unit #2.
C:HARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS • 520 EAST HYMAN • SUITE 301 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 0 970/925-5590 FAX 970/925-5076
d. The driveway will be posted with fire lane signs as directed by the Fire
Marshall along the North property line.
e. The driveway gradient and intersection with Park Avenue will be constructed
in compliance with City Engineering Department standards.
3. If the two parking spaces provided for the ADU's are objectionable to P&Z, the
Applicant is. willing to delete them and just provide a back-up area in that
location. A clause could *be placed in the Affordable Housing Deed Restriction
that preference will be given to renters who 'do not have an automobile.
4. It is our understanding that the Aspen Parks Department would like to obtain a
trail easement on the river side of the irrigation ditch which was not shown on the
Aspen Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant is willing to consider granting such an
easement provided he is given the requested conditional use approval for the
ADU's. This would also enhance the pedestrian accessibility to town for the
renters. Another win/win solution.
B. Steam Margin Review
1. We have shown the proposed development plans to Ernst and Linda Kappeli,
who are the owners and operators of the irrigation ditch that crosses the property.
They have expressed approval and support for this application and sent a letter
to that effect. (See attached Exhibit B).
2. As stated above, the Applicant is willing to consider granting a trail easement that
is being proposed by the Aspen Parks Department provided the ADU application
is satisfactorily resolved. However, we have no information on the specifics at this
time and cannot comment as to the possible impact it may have on the privacy
of the proposed residences, etc. We do wish to emphasize that any trail
development work would .have to be done in such a way as to minimize
disruption of the natural riparian vegetation, especially trees, in keeping with the
Stream Margin Review standards.
In conclusion, we hope these comments and supplemental documentation will be useful in
reaching a mutually satisfactory resolution of the Application for Conditional Use (ADU) and
Stream Margin Review for this project. Please let me know if you need any further information.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Ja Yer Derring
Pr ject ArchitE
enclosures
'�< —. '•�\ /... \.: �•;%�\.:` .1 •'- � - r`I ( ------ �---'; ';:-- �;------ -' '_I =1-. it � J
ca-
44
IX
` � -- - � `. \ • ' ; !i' � l • .•�:_ . ��- .._ . to :,,. '' '�•
j ti�\ 1. -\ �� ..` �, ;- � � !� , ��Ij : �� � /' �'' - '� • ��
i `, , l i , I roil•' • �!'I'/; 1 -•I �_ , -- --. '.. .
<' 1 I I JAI I I ( )
In
J `, is •� �• _ l 111 + ' ! � �� � , � � I � ,
It I
-!;' � % "-- •� _ \> � � �'`\ "� ,, ;� ! 1 hill ! t, ! i � ,, ,- -
:� i��, _ - ..J•� 11 1 �. � `� .�
t
I
/, �. ; _ ------ •' , .III .� //lll �_. ! I � I i � � I- o—�__ __
r y v < "C'
WIN3AV XdVJ
SLW-LW-44-41NNnJ S-4 7M V"D 1 N3PVl San N! S d700 o
CL
= a d
S
\(41bL
Ar
t- v
Al
It
Zj i
PR
JI
Ix
1 \� _ o
l \ i
kJ
33
'pi i e
\ / O
_ r
a t
y��
a Il\\�
a \
1
9
-S D-M-ID2fN333fNNnD S37HV14D 1W hI-'53AN!Sb700
co T
lu
1 o v
qj
Ail
rA
IL
JA
It
le
a
lY
�- / E�> <. / ; � ���• ' \ as �� � 3�� o
iD 1 / t / t
•� \` mil\ \� � ; � � � .( � � � \, �./ ,_ �u / t .��.,1 ^ 1
\ \ / ' \ \ % � / /^�? � 'i � _� ►! `.lip o ' a� o
"
xZz
z � 2
61
J\ °�
-� y
19,.6llUJl0C ;uv3 • WULVLUfUC =3U1 • SUtl W A-" 1M1 WOhUIUJ /Sv3 uC
9COSiZfJCOCXY3'O,SSSZfJCOf 31i1• t19tVW*t43.iW- WE R"-t VNltl t 1Sr30ZS
oi2o £S
51.D3l/f-lJ2iV 3JJ/NN(1_-) S37?1VND :t N3rYlS3n N/ s tt7o,?
X
CO
kP
W
Y (( -��
>15
r~fib
. ' =� +c
�� ZZ >3 0
\ tl
10
lit
aN
J
=3ilr
r u°�
ka
Z -
\
0
Ape
o \
YL6:SiCJ(UE%df•IXSS-SZF-:i�1=31ll'11YINi7J N.4RiV•lUt 3U(1S'M•1vAlI l5Y3 ULS 1 vv. V �A f
SL73LlE-l.J?tv9-44Ir' NnJ S3Mv"j 1N3"l-S3AN1.JStf70� : Q
A
9 d
1-1 tl
gal
� �� w � � �' r - \�' tea\ �-`� --•-• �� A_ �/
tit
IL
J �
o
I- I/AAtT ®F off..
Pro F E-KT-i L-1 N E= WA.-1,
I-E P.L-14VT-j
L-r)e-gs
I � i 6, r-:r. ,::
EXHIBIT A-5
CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS
520 E. HYMAN - - SUITE 301 - ASPEN, CO 81611 - TELE.- 3031925.5590 - FAX. 3031925-5076
BOX 2863 - TELLURIDE, CO 810 - TELE: 303a28-3M - FAX:- 3031n&W 220 E. COLORADO -AVE. VAI
0 COPYRIGHT 199Z CHARLES CURNIfFE ARCHITECTS
(EXHIBIT A-6
CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS
520 E. HYMAN • SUITE 301 • ASPEN, CO 81611 • TELE: 303/925-5590 • FAX 303/925-5076
® F-F P/1-, t2 K A�4 220 E. COLORADO AVE. - BOX 28M • TELLURIDE, CO 81435 - TELL 303MO-3738 • FAk 303a&9567 r 1
COPYRIGHT 1992 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS
July 22, 1996
Bob Nevins, Planner
Aspen/Pitkin Community Development
130 South Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: Colas- Conditional Use & Stream Margin Review
Parcel A off Park Avenue
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mr. Nevins,
We are the sole proprietors of the Aspen Ditch Group which owns and maintains the Aspen Ditch
and Water Right, No. 451, Priority No. 640, which crosses the subject land parcel which you are
reviewing for development approvals. We have discussed the proposed location of the two
detached single family residences with Janver Derrington of Charles Cunniffe Architects who is
representing the applicant. Based on that conversation and after looking at the site plan and
section through the property, we understand that the nearest point of the building construction
to the ditch will be at least five (5) feet from the centerline of the ditch.
Our ditch maintenance operations are done by manual labor with hand tools only, since the
ditch is lined with wood and a back hoe or other mechanical devices would destroy it. The five
(5) foot minimum clearance, which only occurs at one column of the deck at Unit 1, is sufficient
for our purposes.
Our only concerns are for any damage that may be done during the construction process. We
expect the construction company to exercise diligence in not damaging the ditch in any way,
and being responsible to repair any damage or leaks that develop because of the construction
process. Any rocks or dirt that fall into the ditch should also be removed immediately. We also
expect the construction company to provide sufficient supervision so that lunch bags, plastics,
soda cans, and any other wastes are not "disposed of" in the ditch and that any of such items
which may inadvertently fall in the ditch are retrieved. This standard should also apply to any
future owners. Given the steepness of the ditch bank with construction going on above it, to
protect the ditch as well as the safety of children who may be living there in the future, it might
be necessary to culvert a section of the ditch with a 3 foot minimum diameter to make access
as simple as possible.
If these concerns can be addressed, we would like to express our approval and support of the
proposed development on this land parcel as presented in the application for Conditional Use
and Stream Margin Review.
Sincerely,
�- ASPEN DITCH GROUP
` � 1
Ernst Kappeli /
Xndaappeli
CL J\ 1 1 1 U 1 t "
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bob Nevins -Community Development
THRU: George Robinson -Parks Director
FR: Rebecca Baker -Assistant Parks Director
John D. Krueger -Trails Supervisor
RE: Colas Investment, LLC. Application for Conditional Use for the ADU and
Stream Margin Review
DATE: July 29, 1996
After our site visit of July 29, 1996 to the applicant's property we would offer the
following comments.
In the application there is some discussion of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and
trails and how they are incorporated into the Stream Margin Review. The discussion
states that there are no trail issues that impact the parcel.
In the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway System Plan, An Addendum to the
Park/Recreation/Open Space Trails Element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan
(PED PLAN) issued in September of 1990, it states the goals and objectives of the
pedestrian and bikeway system in town. It emphasizes the need to connect existing trails
and develop trail corridors along and adjacent to water ways in the area. This trail
easement would also meet all of the right of way acquisition criteria listed in the PED
PLAN. This trail corridor is a critical link in the trail system that is now undeveloped
along the Roaring Fork River from Herron Park to Cooper Street. It has been a trail
development objective for some 30 years.
In conjunction with these goals, we would request a trail easement area below the
Riverside Ditch for the future trail construction. The easement area would be defined
with an upward northern limit as the centerline of Riverside Ditch south to the lower limit
the property boundary to (as shown on the attached GIS map of the area). This easement
will be a condition of approval for the Stream Margin Review Application.
This proposed easement area is not scheduled for.dL-velopment. A trail in this area
would have little impact on the development above it. The terrain and other conditions in
this area might mike it difficult to construct a trail. Flexibility is needed to properly plan
a trail alignment through this area. Therefore we would request an easement for the area
described to give the needed flexibility for trail design and construction.
COLASIDOC
July 26, 1996
Bob Nevins
Community Development Department
City of Aspen
130 South Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
re: Two Detached Single Family Residences for Colas Investments, LLC
Parcel A off Park Avenue at Regent Street, Aspen, Colorado
.�_rranm
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
INTERIORS
In furtherance of the July 2, 1996 Public Hearing for Conditional Use (ADU) and Stream Margin
Review, we are herewith submitting the following revisions for consideration -by the Aspen
Planning & Zoning Commission at the continued Public Hearing on August 6, 1996.
A. Conditional Use (ADU)
1. We expect Mr. Sylvio Tabet to be in attendance at the continued hearing to
discuss the application directly with P&Z. We have spoken with the adjoining land
owners; Dieter Bibbig, Arne Marthinsson and Magne Nostdahl; all of whom have
expressed support for this proposed land use and who also plan to attend the
continued hearing. We wish to emphasize that the intent of the ADU's is to
provide affordable housing within close proximity to city bus routes and easy
walking distance to town. All of the people who will be impacted feel that
affordable housing is appropriate for this property. By having local people living
there who have regular jobs and possibly provide maintenance for these
dwellings, for a stipend or reduced rent, the Owner has the benefit of added
security against burglary or vandalism. This is a win/win scenario and is quite
compatible with the existing zoning and demography of the neighborhood.
2. With regard to access/egress for automobiles and fire trucks, we have
superimposed circulation diagrams on the site plan which has been modified for
easier maneuvering. (See attached Exhibits A-1 through A-6) We have shown
these documents to the adjoining land owners who have expressed willingness to
enter into a common boundary landscaping and maintenance agreement along
the North boundary and encroachment licenses for the garage along the East
boundary. We have also met with the Fire Marshall, Ed Van Walraven, who finds
t[l,e project to be acceptable with the proposed modifications listed below:
a. Both of the residences (and ADU's) will have automatic fire sprinkler systems
that comply with NFPA 13.D
b. The grass block lawn area will have a compacted road base similar to the
asphalt paved driveway.
c. There will be no balconies projecting beyond the exterior walls of the ADU
for Unit # 1 on the North or East elevations. There will be no such restrictions
for the ADU for Unit #2.
CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS • 520 EAST HYMAN • SUITE 301 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ° 97C/925-5590 FAX 970/925-5076
d. The driveway will be posted with fire lane signs as directed by the Fire
Marshall along the North property line.
e. The driveway gradient and intersection with Park Avenue will be constructed
in compliance with City Engineering Department standards.
3. If the two parking spaces provided for the ADU's are objectionable to P&Z, the
Applicant is willing to delete them and just provide a back-up area in that
location. A clause could be placed in the Affordable Housing Deed Restriction
that preference will be given to renters who 'do not have an automobile.
4. It is our understanding that the Aspen Parks Department would like to obtain a
trail easement on the river side of the irrigation ditch which was not shown on the
Aspen Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant is willing to consider granting such an
easement provided he is given the requested conditional use approval for the
ADU's. This would also enhance the pedestrian accessibility to town for the
renters. Another win/win solution.
B. Steam Margin Review
1. We have shown the proposed development plans to Ernst and Linda Kappeli,
who are the owners and operators of the irrigation ditch that crosses the property.
They have expressed approval and support for this application and sent a letter
to that effect. (See attached Exhibit B) .
2. As stated above, the Applicant is willing to consider granting a trail easement that
is being proposed by the Aspen Parks Department provided the ADU application
is satisfactorily resolved. However, we have no information on the specifics at this
time and cannot comment as to the possible impact it may have on the privacy
of the proposed residences, etc. We do wish to emphasize that any trail
development work would have to be done in such a way as to minimize
disruption of the natural riparian vegetation, especially trees, in keeping with the
Stream Margin Review standards.
In conclusion, we hope these comments and supplemental documentation will be useful in
reaching a mutually satisfactory resolution of the Application for Conditional Use (ADU) and
Stream Margin Review for this project. Please let me know if you need any further information.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Ja er Derring
Pr ject Archite
enclosures
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Bob Nevins CC Nick Adeh
'rom: Chuck Roth
ostmark: Aug.01,96 7:46 AM
Subject: Reply to: Referral Memos
Reply text:
From Chuck Roth:
If access not created as outlot, provide new easement that
additionally states easement is unrestricted with no right for any
development on the easement which restricts the access intent. and
that the intent is to convey a clear 20' travel access. Require ADU
parking spaces because little or no on -street parking in.area.
Eng'ring Dept to review maint. agreement & encroachment licenses
prior to execution, & new access easement. Include in condition snow
removal, not plowed to side, on access easement.
Preceding message:
From Bob Nevins:
Just a reminder that P/Z packets are due TODAY -Thursday, August 1!
I would like memos for: Pickus ADU (Eng./Parks) and Colas ADU and
Stream Margin (Eng). The Day Subdivision is on -hold until Planning
and the applicant reach an agreement on the affordable housing
mitigation component of the proposal. Let me know how you're doing
or if there are any problems. THANKS.
LAj
-it
` {
40
T,
If
it
, ` •j � 1 r {• {/ 1. '.� (I I -�___� �� , � r .� _
' � � � � '•. ,' III: ,I ��- ? _.
\ �� , '', / r � / / • ��,� I I - r f � I I 11 _-
� \ } I %` - ' � I • 11 �. _ 1 - -�--__ -
`\ __. � .., - '' I j' I •-.� �� III _\•\_�-, � / _ --•------ _
-- -
z %• ! r / � un
�.
l'
l� I
_ -,_- Ill. •:/ ///l ' ' ! I � 1 i ,!/ � i � `� -----
joA
41
Nv�
'Il.Ir„LiJ(1><�kVi'(X,SS'Sif✓C(i(-)Itt'117111 U.)�NtfSY'IU( )IN K'Nt1VA1/!$VI Oi.S
10
All
SI-W-L1N.72fV 3-41INNn-) S37NdN'.7
ao �'
r
1 � � 1 G
Id
\�.1
41 /
OUVNOIOJ 'N3dSV
3f1N3AV N8Vd
11\13W153ANI SV700
T
�
M
T
d
�
3
F
#,QjJtj
UUUUj�
L,
QL �111
Z
i
5L7.9LIHD V-4-4-11NNnD sjisv"D 1N3iV1S3�INl' Sb'7o� �
x N z
il ( CL
CL f_ 3
gA
a4 �
L'r
n
\ N� \• / a vC6v 3 ylX n
la
IN
� q
RA
3 � F
10 \ \
r
i C45GiJZ!/EOE :xvi • ttfL£9ZC/EIK 3111 • Sft•tQ co '301Nf13131. • OOYNOIQJ LSV3 tri �..'d
9COSiZNfOf=XVi-0,553ZF/f0f 3171.• (t9tQW'N34SV- W 31K)S•NVW.1Iti5Y30Z5 � �Q:�/f�iOy1♦� %,11�Udya� -•'
` e`•. 1 g
S1J311HJHV 3_4JINNnJ S3777VHJ 1N33nlS3ANI SV7dj'
M
V o =+ aIL
\ ; y
A _ z
K"
14
ui
v
-
~ r iA
�-.�� _ _ �-yam,,\-�� � c° '/ •'" �.--.3 / �-.', � 'Si $ v� i.��, �
'>,3
Ir
Vt
ON
/ -'` . '• �. off; � r � �! �� � / � o �� t �'� i
•\ , / �� e
A� N4
0
a � .
:XV1 * P(MrIAIK :3u1. smq ()J.*.X1R1m131 - (XwdO)O.) LSV3 W
119MODU16Y, tOC 31Jf5,f41,A*4A1f1MOT5
Sj--M-L 1"DM V 944INNnD sg 7m v"D
f C. "M3AS4.1%l'if
a7
ily
,1N3"1.S-3AN1 V701�j
t3
LJAALT OF 00tA-?Tr2qc-Tl0�-1 A0,11F-)l Oom-
Ll H E YVAL-1,
H
A PFR OX, EEI� I's
EF- T I Aev Phi l�L
VI/
EXHIBIT A-5
CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS
520 E. HYMAN - SUITE 301 - ASPEN, CO 81611 - TELE: 303/925-5590 - FAX. 3031925-5976
220 E. COLORADO -AVE. - BOX280 - fELLURIDE,CO81435 - TELL-303/728-M - FAX 303rr28-gW
c o ® COPYRIGHT 199Z CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS
u p par-, T i 51.t215-Vla� K-EQ
you ► rD aTZ'!�-> L4 --ry jz�
XI�'�rJG G�
L-AWt� Tz�)
,4f:,PR, oK , b l/ To ) ,211
Floes ! pE
/oo AA Il T,
0 L4 E� Fl�- tiVA- LJL
EXHIBIT A--6
CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS
520 E. HYMAN - SUITE 301 • ASPEN, CO 81611 • TELE: 303/925-55W • FAX. 303/9&5076
O r-F py�-, t2 K- A�,ls HL4 E. 220 E. COLORAOO AVE. • BOX 28M • TELLURIDE, CO 81435 • TELL 303/728-3738 • FAX: 303/728-9567
® COPYRIGHT in CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS
July 22, 1996
Bob Nevins, Planner
Aspen/Pitkin Community Development
130 South Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: Colas Conditional Use & Stream Margin Review
Parcel A off Park Avenue
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mr. Nevins,
We are the sole proprietors of the Aspen Ditch Group which owns and maintains the Aspen Ditch
and Water Right, No. 451, Priority No. 640, which crosses the subject land parcel which you are
reviewing for development approvals. We have discussed the proposed location of the two
detached single family residences with Janver Derrington of Charles Cunniffe Architects who is
representing the applicant. Based on that conversation and after looking at the site plan and
section through the property, we understand that the nearest point of the building construction
to the ditch will be at least five (5) feet from the centerline of the ditch.
Our ditch maintenance operations are done by manual labor with hand tools only, since the
ditch is lined with wood and a back hoe or other mechanical devices would destroy it. The five
(5) foot minimum clearance, which only occurs at one column of the deck at Unit 1, is sufficient
for our purposes.
Our only concerns are for any damage that may be done during the construction process. We
expect the construction company to exercise diligence in not damaging the ditch in any way,
and being responsible to repair any damage or leaks that develop because of the construction
process. Any rocks or dirt that fall into the ditch should also be removed immediately. We also
expect the construction company to provide sufficient supervision so that lunch bags, plastics,
soda cans, and any other wastes are not "disposed of" in the ditch and that any of such items
which may inadvertently fall in the ditch are retrieved. This standard should also apply to any
future owners. Given the steepness of the ditch bank with construction going on above it, to
protect the ditch as well as the safety of children who may be living there in the future, it might
be necessary to culvert a section of the ditch with a 3 foot minimum diameter to make access
as simple as possible.
If these concerns can be addressed, we would like to express our approval and support of the
proposed development on this land parcel as presented in the application for Conditional Use
and Stream Margin Review.
Sincerely,
ASPEN DITCH GROUP
Ernst Kappeli
Xindaappeli
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bob Nevins -Community Development
THRU: George Robinson -Parks Director
FR: Rebecca Baker -Assistant Parks Director
John D. Krueger -Trails Supervisor
RE: Colas Investment, LLC. Application for Conditional Use for the ADU and
Stream Margin Review
DATE: July 29, 1996
After our site visit of July 29, 1996 to the applicant's property we would offer the
following comments.
In the application there is some discussion of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and
trails and how they are incorporated into the Stream Margin Review. The discussion
states that there are no trail issues that impact the parcel.
In the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway System Plan, An Addendum to the
Park/Recreation/Open Space Trails Element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan
(PED PLAN) issued in September of 1990, it states the goals and objectives of the
pedestrian and bikeway system in town. It emphasizes the need to connect existing trails
and develop trail corridors along and adjacent to water ways in the area. This trail
easement would also meet all of the right of way acquisition criteria listed in the PED
PLAN. This trail corridor is a critical link in the trail system that is now undeveloped
along the Roaring Fork River from Herron Park to Cooper Street. It has been a trail
development objective for some 30 years.
In conjunction with these goals, we would request a trail easement area below the
Riverside Ditch for the future trail construction. The easement area would be defined
with an upward northern limit as the centerline of Riverside Ditch south to the lower limit
the property boundary to (as shown on the attached GIS map of the area). This easement
will be a condition of approval for the Stream Margin Review Application.
This proposed easement area is not scheduled for development. A trail in this area
would have little impact on the development above it. The terrain and other conditions in
this area might mike it difficult to construct a trail. Flexibility is needed to properly plan
a trail alignment through this area. Therefore we would request an easement for the area
described to give the needed flexibility for trail design and construction.
COLASIDOC
Exhibit B
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Bob Nevins CC Nick Adeh
'rom: Chuck Roth
-Iostmark: Aug.01,96 7:46 AM
Subject: Reply to: Referral Memos
Reply text:
From Chuck Roth:
If access not created as outlot, provide new easement that
additionally states easement is unrestricted with no right for any
development on the easement which restricts the access intent.and
that the intent is to convey a clear 20' travel access. Require ADU
parking spaces because little or no on -street parking in area.
Eng'ring Dept to review maint. agreement & encroachment licenses
prior to execution, & new access easement. Include in condition snow
removal, not plowed to side, on access easement.
Preceding message:
From Bob Nevins:
Just a reminder that P/Z packets are due TODAY -Thursday, August 1!
I would like memos for: Pickus ADU (Eng./Parks) and Colas ADU and
Stream Margin (Eng). The Day Subdivision is on -hold until Planning
and the applicant reach an agreement on the affordable housing
mitigation component of the proposal. Let me know how you're doing
or if there are any problems. THANKS.
I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU: Dave Michaelson, Deputy Director
FROM: Bob Nevins, City Planner
RE: Colas Conditional Use and Stream Margin Review
Potential Site Development Summaries within the R-6 Zone
DATE: August 6, 1996
Based on the R-6 zone district requirements, the Colas property has a range of potential development
scenarios. The development options are summarized as follows:
Lot area: 13,155.0 sf
Over 30% slopes - 3,290.0 sf
Net lot area 9,865.0 sf
(for allowable FAR)
Single-family Residence (9,000-15,000 sf lot)
9,000 sf 3,660.0 sf of FAR
865 sf (6 sf/100 sf lot area) 51.9 sf of FAR
Allowable FAR _ 3,711.9 sf of FAR
Duplex or Two, detached Residences (9,000 sf or greater lots)
9,000 sf 4,080.0 sf of FAR
865 sf (6 ft/100 sf lot area) 51.9 sf of FAR
Allowable FAR 4,131.9 sf of FAR
Colas Proposal, Two detached Residences with.Two ADU's
Per Unit Total (both units)
Main Residence FAR 1,563.5 sf 3,127.0 sf
ADU FAR 287.2 sf 574.4 sf
ADU Stair (over 15%) 71.2 sf 142.4 sf
ADU Deck (over 15%) 48.0 sf 48.0 sf
Proposed FAR 1,969.9 sf 3,891.8 sf
Available FAR + 96.1 sf + 240.1 sf
SUMMARY: The current Colas proposal to create two, detached single-family residences with a total FAR
of 3,891.8 sf is 179.9 sf more than would be permitted for one, 3,711.9 sf single-family residence or
240.1 sf less than maximum FAR for two detached residences or duplex. The two detached units proposed
each contain 1,563.5 sf of FAR or about 42% of the FAR allowed for a single residence on the site.
The approximate cash -in -lieu for the two, detached residences would be approximately $79,210.00; the
cash -in -lieu payment for one, single-family residence would be about $71,160.00.