The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.1150 Cemetery Ln.0033.2006.ASLUCity of Aspen Community Development Dept. CASE NUMBER 0033.2006.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2735-01-3-14-001 PROJECT ADDRESS 1150 CEMETERY LN PLANNER JESSICA GARROW CASE DESCRIPTION ALSO #102: SEEKING VARIANCES REPRESENTATIVE JACK MILLER 927-9513 DATE OF FINAL ACTION 12/12/2006 12 CLOSED BY Johannah Richards DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date o f this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. YE II LLC; PO Box 3 81 Wrightsvi lle Beach, NC 28480; (970) 379-7955 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Condo: Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102. located at 1150 Cemetery Lane. Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property The applicant has received Residential Design Guidelines variance approval from the entry setback. garage setback, and garage width to construct a duplex at 1150 Cemetery Lane. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Approval for land use reviews associated with construction. Land Use Approvaks) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) November 19,2006 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) November 20,2009 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 19th day of November, 2006, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. Chris Bendon, Comi~nity DeÂ¢elopment Director PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public o f the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Condo: Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102, located at 1150 Cemetery Lane, by Residential Design Standards Variances on November 20,2006. The Applicant received approval of three Residential Design Standards variances, including entry door setback, garage setback, and garage width. For further information contact Jessica Garrow, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 429-2780. s/ City of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times on November 19,2006 PUBUC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific deve}opment pian, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of As- pen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to,the following described property: Condo: Doubl Â· Shaft Unit 10] and 102, located at 1150 Cemete y Lane, by Residential De- sign Standards Variances on November 20,2006. The Applicant received approval 01 three Resi dential Design Standarq: c,ariances, including en try door setback, garage setback, and garage width. For further information contact Jessica Garrow, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 429Â· 2780. st City of Aspen Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on Novern- ber 19,2006. (4219) Section 18: Vested Property Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 1150 Cemetery Lane., City of Aspen, by Administrative Variances o f the Aspen Community Development Director. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (Eh ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ) 1~50 61 4-242*\/ l-a Mv, Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 3 0~ 17(/6(0/ , 200- STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) - UNA 1- I, L.~ G IAL ES (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: '><~ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting ofnotice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters nol less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first Clas. postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text o f this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation; or otherwise, the requirement o f an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners o f real property in the area o f the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ~uÂ«%6 - --047 ~,fignature The fumgoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ~j,kf~clay of Oatlk- , 200~ by JÂ»76-5 04/277- PUBI 'C NOTICE RE: 1150 CEMETERY LANE-RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS NOTICE 5 HEREBY GIVEN that a public WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL hearing will be bid on Tuesday, October 17, 2006, at a meeting t, begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister , Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., _ My cornrnission expires: d 47~-P~,<2 620 7- Aspen, to consider an application submitted by YE [I, LLC, 1150 Cemetery Lane, Aspen, Colorado 91Ug>j _92-1 81611, owner of the subject property, represent- ed by Jack Miller Architects. The applicant is pro- posing to construct a duplex on the subject prop- erty and is requesting Residential Design Guide- line Variances for garage width, garage setback, (5*7 Public / and entry door setback. The property is ~egally described as Condo: Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further in- , 9"n, >,--9 formation, contact Jessica Garrow at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2780, jessi- Al . cag@ci.aspen.co.us. .'.(51 s/ S. Jasmine Tygre, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission d Li 3'-c~Â·077Â· i Published in the Aspen T..ies Weekly on October l. G 1,2006.(4094) ATTACHMENTS: i, ..'c ........ '1 TE OF V COPY OF THE PUBLICATION 4 PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 1Te, MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission JAk THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Community Development Deputy Director FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planner~fÂ¥~ RE: Pitkin Mesa Duplex (1150 Cemetery Lane) - Residential Design Guideline Variances - Resolution No. 36)Series 2006 - Public Hearing (Parcel 2735-013-14- 001/002) DATE: October 17,2006 APPLICANT /OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: John Elmore, YE II, LLC Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the requested variances. REPRESENTATIVE: Jack Miller, Jack Miller and SUMMARY: Associates The Applicant requests o f the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of three (3) variances from the LOCATION: Residential Design Standards to construct a duplex. Condo: Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102, City and Townsite of ~035*fgaaia7--: i~ Aspen, CO, commonly known as - m*im.6/ 1150 Cemetery Lane CURRENT ZONING & USE Empty parcel located in the ~Â£7 muii~ 110.13Um/mill//11#W 1 7 1 Â·r-7--ia Moderate-Density Residential (R- lÂ·-433:29.-ty*<2 ~r#~.-:R-zE--,rn*---2"Â·k 15) zone district. I-:iet-?:4,5:3::Â·43,7.9...tttit..:#::1.32-7.x -'. ~C:~.- 'zRÂ®'-- ~Â£4--,vhtitÂ·a Mtfit=2146~.iwk#4~*4.236*02; ;7 10 4.1 2- -,vilf#*/.#*,4 :Â·,i 'ZÂ·:kÂ·:4Â·'1Â·k PROPOSED LAND USE: lixillimi;IMBmini#*~291980/liffer#69.241.*re#Jilizfijiti..... 4â‚¬fâ‚¬*3.<fe ~Â·Â£*2~s.-PalitÂ·,8.Mie}jÂ·r:Â£... -R, Â·:.Â·. L-,6 '. -.-5-- -Â·~?5Â· ~-Â· ~ Â·~Â·>w;02'â‚¬405*23 ....1- ............ . '* ..6 The Applicant is requesting to '411#MI..ar--**,-,ty Â·Â·k'Â· Â·-,-Â·: * tri: A:7< 3Â·2fh-'2: 4'.-Â·r.Â·Â·6Â·< 31;,14-:;'P*r,Airl develop a two story duplex. ~*9*44*64#4-4.96â‚¬fSÂ».~~ . 042%14%2444,~4~ Photo of the subject property LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission to redevelop the site: â€¢ Residential Design Standards Variances for a duplex within the City of Aspen requiring a building permit pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.410. Page 1 0 f 4 0.22 4.jf:11-*4~"~' 19 Â·-Ill ; 1,41" 0 . 4 A PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant, YE II, LLC, has requested approval to construct a duplex on a vacant 15,942 square foot lot located at 1150 Cemetery Lane. The existing property is located in the Moderate Density Residential (R-15) zone district. The lot is triangle shaped and contains slopes along the rear of the lot. As outlined in Table 1 below, the proposed development meets the dimensional requirements of the R-15 zone district. The Cemetery Lane bike path, located slightly above grade on the opposite side o f the street, provides bike and pedestrian access to the property. Table 1: Comparison of Proposed vs. Required Dimensional Requirements c Proposed Underlying Moderate Density Residential Dimensional Dimensional Requirements , Â· (It-15) Zone District Requirements Requirements Minimum Lot Size 15,942 sq. ft. 15,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 157.64 ft. 75 ft. Minimum Lot 7,500 sq. ft. for duplex 7,971 sq. ft. Area/Dwelling 15,000 for detached residential dwelling Minimum Front Yard 25 ft. 25 ft. for residential dwellings Setback Minimum Side Yard 10 ft. 10 ft. Setback Minimum Rear Yard 10 ft. for principal buildings, 5 ft. for accessory 10 ft. Setback buildings Maximum Height 24 ft. 8 in. 25 ft. Minimum Distance 10 ft. N/A between Buildings on Lot Pedestrian Amenity Space N/A No Requirement 15,000 - 50,000 sq. ft. lot size: 4,920 sq. ft. of floor area, plus 6 square feet of floor area for External Floor Area Ratio 4,550 sq. ft. each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area; (FAR) for one Duplex maximum of 7,020 sq. ft. of floor area On this lot, 4,976 sq. ft. is permitted. STAFF COMMENTS: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REVIEW: As part of the land use review, the Applicant is requesting approval of Residential Design Standards variances for the proposed duplex. The intent of the design criteria is to, "preserve established neighborhood scale and character, and to ensure that Aspen's streets and neighborhoods are public places conducive to walking." The subject property is located at 1150 Cemetery Lane. The project requires three (3) Residential Standards variances, outlined below: 1. Garage Width Varianee The Applicant requests a variance from the garage width requirement, which states "the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at least 5 feet greater than the width of the garage or carport." The intent of the standard is to "minimize the potential conflicts between Page 2 0 f 4 not subject to the high pedestrian traffic found in Aspen's downtown core. Staff does not find the argument that the garage setbacks appropriate given the reduced levels of pedestrian and bicycle traffic persuasive, as there is a bike path across the street from the lot, providing pedestrian and bicycle access to the area. There are a number of areas in the buildable portion of the lot which are not utilized, and an alternative design solution could be developed to better meet this standard. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding: The lot is a triangle shape and has some steep slopes on its northeastern boundary. Staff does not feel this represents a significant hardship that warrants a variance from garage setback. The applicant states there is not sufficient space for vehicular circulation unless the garages are forward of the living area. There are a number of areas in the buildable portion of the lot that are not utilized. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. Variance Requested Entry Door Setback. (26.410.040 Dla) The entry door shall face the street and be no more than , ten feet (10'0") backfrom the front most wall of the 2*:Â·.31 -St 1 44*1Â· building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight feet. 1 ,Â·-O-5-52Â£2904 A h E-5.%*fak:122,1 ~ P HAÂ«., i X/// 4 . .1 6,1 111 .... // / a) Provides an appropriate design or pattern of ~4/ ' >~2 49-955 i development considering tile context in which h .. v:Li:-4 b,1 the development is proposed and purpose of the / particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, Staff Finding: There are two entry doors on the duplex. The applicant proposes using each unit's front most wall, rather than the building' s front wall to measure setbacks for this standard. Staff does not agree, and finds the front most wall of the building, the garage for the northern most unit, is the appropriate faQade to measure from. The intent of this standard of this standard is to "ensure each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the fagade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions." The southern most unit's entry has a setback of twenty-one (21) feet from the front most wall of the structure. This is more than double the permitted setback. Staff does not believe this conforms with the intent of the standard. Staff does not find this criterion to ~ be met. Exhibit A, Staff findings for 1150 Cemetery Lane, Page 3 rligr -45 5 '> b) Be clearly necessary for reasons offairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding: The applicant states the entry setback is a result of the offset between the two units. Staff does not believe the site' s triangle shape and steep slopes compel a variance from this standard. There is available space in the lot's buildable area that could be utilized to better conform to the standard. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. Exhibit A, Staff findings for 1150 Cemetery Lane, Page 4 EXHIBIT A: REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS The Planning and Zoning Commission may grant variances from the Residential Design Standards if the proposed application meets the following: a) Provides an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feets is necessary to determine ifthe exception is warranted; or, b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. The following are Staff's findings in regards to the variances being requested by the Applicant. Variance Requested Garage Width. (26.410.040 C2a) -=590 /74-- On the street facing facade(s), the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the width of the garage or carport. /-- X -1 +L-*244-1 a) Provides an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship Of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, Staff Finding: The duplex includes a two car garage for each unit. The width of each garage is 22 feet, making the total garage width for the structure 44 feet. The first floor living area is twenty-five (25) feet in width. The garages are nearly double the living area width, greatly exceeding the standard. Although each unit is required to provide off-street parking spaces, they are not required to be provided in a garage. Section 26.515 of the Land Use Code addresses o ff-street parking requirements. In a duplex outside of the infill area, the parking requirement is the lesser of one space per bedroom or 2 spaces per unit. The code also permits the parking be provided through "stacking" in the front of the lot - i.e. where parking is not provided in a garage, but is provided on-site and allows ears to park behind one another. With an alternative design, the garage width could be reduced or relocated on the site to create a front faGade that better addresses the street. Additionally, the applicant is not required to provide 2 spaces per unit, as each unit only includes one bedroom. Exhibit A, Staff findings for 1150 Cemetery Lane, Page 1 The applicant included examples along Cemetery Lane to illustrate how the design fits with the character of the area. While it is true that there are a number of similar layouts in the Cemetery Lane area, this property is somewhat separated from the suburban layout by distance and vegetation. Staff does not find these examples compelling, as the proposed design also does not meet the intent of the standard. The applicant states this area o f town is not subject to the high pedestrian traffic found in Aspen' s downtown core. Staff does not find the argument that the garage width is appropriate given the reduced levels of pedestrian and bicycle traffic persuasive, as there is a bike path across the street from the lot which provides pedestrian and bicycle access to the area. Staff does not find the criteria for granting a variance is met. b) Be clearly necessary for reasons offairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Finding: While the lot does include steep slopes, the design does not utilize all space available on the lot that is not in steep slope areas. The lot is also a triangle shape, but the design does not utilize all space available within the buildable area. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. Variance Requested GaraRe Setback. (26.410.040 C2b) The front facade of the garage or the front most supporting column ofa carport shall be set back at least ! 1 ten feet (10' 0") further from the street than the front most wall of the house. a) Provides an appropriate design or pattern of Vmo development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of f. \ 2 1 the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board nlay consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, Staff Finding: As designed, the front most wall of the house is the garage for the northernmost unit. The stated intent of this standard is to "minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist" (26.410.040 C). The southernmost unit is set back twenty-one (21) feet from the front most wall, and the northern unit is set back six (6) feet from the front most wall. Staff finds the proposed design does not meet the intent of the standard. The applicant states the area of town is Exhibit A, Staff findings for 1150 Cemetery Lane, Page 2 .. pedestrian and automobile traffic... [and-] minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape." The proposed garage measures forty-four (44) feet in length and the living area measures twenty-five (25) feet in length, creating a street facing fagade where the garage represents nearly twice the length of the living area. Staff finds the garage width exceeds the standard and fails to meet the intent of the standard. Additionally, there are buildable areas on the lot which are not utilized. Staff recommends against granting this variance. 2. Garage Setback Variance The Applicant requests a variance from the garage setback requirement, which states "the front faQade of the garage...shall be set back at least 10 feet further from the street than the front most wall of the house." The required garage setback helps create a residential environment where the garage is secondary to the living area. The intent of this standard is to "minimize the potential conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic. .. [and-] minimize the presence of garages and earports as a lifeless part of the streetscape." The front fa~ade of the structure is the garage for the northernmost unit, rather than a living area as is required by the standards. The living area (front most wall) for the northern unit is set back six (6) feet from the garage, and the living area (front most wall) of the southern unit is set back twenty-one (21) from the garage. Staff finds that the garage as the front most wall of the structure fails to meet the letter and intent of the standard. The living area is set back behind the garage, rather than the other way around as is required by the Residential Design Guidelines. The placement of the garage forward of the living area facilitates an environment where garages are viewed from the street as the primary use of the structure, rather than secondary as is the intent of the standards. Additionally, there are buildable areas on the lot which are not utilized. Staff recommends against granting this variance. 3. Entry Door Setback The Applicant requests a variance from the entry door setback requirement, which states "the entry door shall face the street and be no more than 10 feet back from the front most wall of the building." The intent of this standard is to "ensure that each residential building has street facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the fagade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions." As stated above, the front most wall of the southern unit is set back twenty-one (21) from the front most wall of the house. This represents more than double the setback permitted by the Residential Design Standards. Staff finds the proposed entry door setback fails to meet the intent or letter of the standard. As above, because the garage is the front most wall of the structure, the entry door and the human scale it' s proximity to the front most wall of the house provides is lost. Additionally, there are buildable areas on the lot which are not utilized. Staff recommends against granting this variance. In reviewing the Residential Design Standards, the project fails to meet three of the requirements. The proposed design does not reflect the intent of the Standards, which is to create human scale development and to ensure the living area is seen as the primary use of the building, rather than the garages. The proposed design fails to utilize all buildable portions of the lot, which could be used to ensure the design meets the letter and intent of the Residential Design Standards. For a Residential Design Standard variance to be granted, Page 3 0 f 4 the proposed design must be appropriate in the given context, and/or must be " clearly necessary for reasons offairness related to unusual site-specific constraints." Staff is not satisfied that these review criteria have been met, and recommends denying the requests. RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes the project fails to meet the variance criteria for the Residential Design Standards. Staff recommends denying the requested variances based on the findings contained within Exhibit A. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. 36) Series of 2006, approving, the three (3) Residential Design Standards variances of YE II, LLC to construct a duplex on the property located at 1150 Cemetery Lane." ATTACHMENTS: ExHIBIT A - Review Criteria and Staff Findings EXHIBIT B - Application EXHIBIT C - Site Plans EXHIBIT D -Survey EXHIBIT E - Citizen Comments. Page 4 0 f 4 I : RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING THREE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCES FOR 1150 CEMETERY LANE, CONDO: DOUBLE SHAFT UNIT 101 AND 102, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, CO, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2735-013-14-001/002 Resolution #_30-06 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from YE II, LLC, represented by Jack Miller Architects, requesting approval of three (3) Residential Design Standards Variances to construct a duplex; and, , WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned R15 (Moderate Density Residential); and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended denial, of the proposed land use requests; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 17, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. , Series of 2006, by a to (_ - 2 vote, approving three Residential Design Standards Variances for the development of a duplex on the property located at 1150 Cemetery Lane, Condo: Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets the applicable development standards and that approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby aproves three (3) Variances from the Residential Design Standards, including Garage Width, Garage Setback, and Entry Door Setback, for the development of a duplex on the property located at 1150 Cemetery Lane, Condo: Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this day of October, 2006. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk C:\Documents and Settings\jessicag\My Documents\Cases\Pitkin Mesa Duplex Variance\1150CemeteryLanePZ Reso 10-17-06 - FINAL.doc Page 1 of 1 Jessica Garrow From: catherine_porter@agilent.com Sent: Tuesday, October 10,2006 1:43 PM To: Jessica Garrow CC: rocket@rof.net; JFuller@wc.corn; catherine_porter@agilent.com Subject: 1150 Cemetery Lane Dear Jessica, I am the owner of 0180 Pitkin Mesa Drive in Aspen, CO, and I received a notice about 1150 Cemetery Lane. As I understand it there will be a meeting concerning this property soon. Since I live here in Washington DC, I will not be able to attend the meeting, but I wanted you to know that I am opposed to any variances and/or easements for this property. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns, Catherine Porter 3616 Fulton Street NW Washington, DC 20007 (o) 202-416-6218 (h) 202-965-1050 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 1 Jessica Garrow From: Roget Kuhn [rocket@rof. net] Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 10:03 AM To: Jessica Garrow Subject: 1150 Cemetary Lane proposed variances. Dear Jessica, We will not be able to attend the meeting. We are against the proposed variances and/or easments for 1150 Cemetary Lane. We have Residential Design Guidelines for a reason. When we built, we had to adhere to them as well and did not receive any variances. Please vote against this proposal. Thank you, Roget and Tonya Kuhn 0130 Pitkin Mesa Dr. Aspen, CO 81611 544-9523 10/17/2006 Sep 26 06 12:10p Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 1150 CEMETERY LANE-RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 17,2006, 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 YE 4 LLC, 1150 Cemetery Lane, Aspen, Colorado 81611, owner of the subject property, represented by Jack Miller Architects. The applicant is proposing to construct a duplex on the subject property and is requesting Residential Design Guideline Variances for garage width, garage setback, and entry door setback. The property is legally described as Condo: Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Jessica Galrow at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, CO, (970) 4292780, jessicag@ci.aspen. co.us. V S. Jasmine Tvere. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on October 1,2006 City of Aspen Account i 'RE,/De/Â·r /06Â¥/CE 'Pest,44 6-u,Dell,JE linkin.106 N 5-6 65--FleTW-LY LA wâ‚¬ @-6 Â»1 e fL â‚¬ y e IC ASPEN POST OFFICE ASPEN, Colorado 816119998 0723550528-0094 09/27/2006 (970)925-7523 05:00:41 PM Sales Receipt Product Sale Unit Final Description Qty Price Price 4.05 Prior 25 $4.05 $101.25 X-Plane PSA ========== Total: $101.25 Paid by: Visa $101.25 Account #: XXXXXXXXXXXX6899 Approval #: 656326 Transaction #: 345 23903030047 Domestic Express Mail provides a money-back guarantee! The original customer copy of the Express Mail label must be presented at the time of refund. Bill#:1000600058415 Clerk:10 All sales final on stamps and postage. Refunds for guaranteed services only. Thank you for your business. Customer Copy ~ CITY OF ASPEN INVOICE 109494 130 S. GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970)920-5040 Page 1 of 1 DUE DATE 9/27/2006 ACCOUNT 00918 AMT DUE 59.73 DEB PRINCE AMOUNT PAID MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO THE CITY OF ASPEN DESCRIPTION AMOUNT , GIS Mailing Labels - 1150 Cemetery Ln 55.00 Sales Tax - GIS taxable mailing labels 4.73 THANK YOU FOR YOUR PROMPT PAYMENT. PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR CHECK. ACCOUNT NO. 00918 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 59.73 Please Remit to: CITY OF ASPEN 130 S. GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1071Â£44199,9 ~ ~ 1 7 fit ASPt N GIS 1 :t) S f,Al ENA ABLN, 60 01611 970-920-545. M, i . b ., 11 1[1. INI â€¢1 ll;i']t 1 114Â·JÂ·; 9 /41 IP: tlu:,-,4152 Sale lit"A 'li>.11 I / Litirf hethod: Swiped A.- 1, 0â€ž1 0-1-LI. 014011 AP.I ,UÂ· 0!liiAÂ¢ 0Â¢Llbil , 09'919 11:...J''k 1[,15,10 Uu C '60 .4,44,11 invoice It: J{10001 f Aol A#r Code: 655000 A ' Ii:,Ii i, T T .... 3 14 14Â·,4 & 9 U , M Â£ iQ 7,1 -I ..1,1,111 C.'-toll: lib. 'HANK <CU . 3.8, 1 / 4 4 - , 4,4 - . .- ..4 - .4 - PUBLIC NOTICE at 11 . DATE -;9 , . tc- , Â¥ AJ-1 1 nME TD Al 6.-t- t '-4 9 + -6 De: : E 5 c 4 -f-,2 1 -F S ME Fr- I MJ J. eoo.., . 3-'94 I i.- *: @U F, ft)â‚¬,/ PLACE PURPOSE â‚¬ 4 < 5â‚¬%7- 6 _ 2.Â·FS 6-9 m.,f DEL.16-3 , A 1 - .- 2 6 C.- 0 02.. f-4.Â£ 0, 1-F ..4..L.23~ ..:-Ref, JLF â€¢---*4 2.*. L.'.t> 67-:2.'7 -1,2<X EF~r-':% FV< - ...1 - 1 jtâ€¢ i f .., -= ,-01-1. 4,>FEE.P:a#=7 6.1 6 BUT. :9 . .....+21 - c. C.15=e, :ittiow- . 7. t M-- FOR FURTHER INFO~ATION CONTACTÂ· THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT -*-I â€¢10 S SALENA ST, ASPEN CO (970~20-5090 m. 1 4 .. .2. . 7. CAT Public Notice For Residential Design Guidelines Variance A:#Â¥N:......74, /floTARV Date Posted: Sept 29,2006 - i - Property: Condo, Double Shaft Unit 101 and 102 13% PUB 1.1 0/ Purpose: Garage width, garage setback, and entry door setback ..6. . **4#W *6;y State of C O ,County of_--~1KLE. Signed Wore me onthh 32[' 40 01 061 204â€¢, Dâ‚¬egeAH Ke{â€¢]Câ‚¬- 9,5044" .PAINGE Ass, 340.-4 +61>klet,Pen- Notary RlÂ«- 9,4--4-â‚¬1/v 1# . 32 - P , lE> Easy Peel Labels AA I See Instruction Sheet I fi, ~AVERYÂ®5160Â® ~ Use AveryÂ® TEMPLATE 5160Â® 1 Feed Â·r for Easy Peel Featurel &1 A FRIDMAN JAIME C/O SIVERNON 100 ELK RUN DR STE 103 BASALT, CO 81621 - .1 GAULT CAROL A HERSHEY CAROLE STELZER 1098 CEMETERY LN PO BOX 2888 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 i KAPSA MICHAEL T HEYMAN RALPH E TRSTE HIRST NEILL S CAMERON-SMITH SHEENA J 10 COURT HOUSE PLAZA SW #1100 300 PUPPY SMITH ST #203-270 PO BOX 3060 DAYRON, OH 45401 ASPEN, CO 81611-1455 ASPEN, CO 81612-3060 KAUFMAN GIDEON I KUHN ROGET D MYERS VIRGINIA V PO BOX 10001 0130 PITKIN MESA DR 1240 SNOWBUNNY LN ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN. CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHILLIPS ARTHUR & HELEN PORTER CATHERINE T RICHARD PETRICK & ASSOC. 110 PITKIN MESA DR 3616 FULTON ST NW 319 MILLER AVE. #2 ASPEN, CO 81611 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 ROBINSON LEE ROSENSTEIN E JAY SADRON ALEXANDRA & NICHOLAS I 0120 PITKIN MESA DR 5000 MONTROSE BLVD #220 PO BOX 7814 ASPEN, CO 81611 HOUSTON, TX 77006 ASPEN, CO 81612 SCHUERING LEO H JR & EILEEN S SCHRAMM JUDITH JANE LIVING TRUST SHERRIFF RICHARD A TRUSTEES 0150 PITKIN MESA DR 746 HILLCREST DR 4475 GARDEN HWY ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621-8547 SACRAMENTO, CA 95837 WORTH CHARLES E & ANN G TRST YE 11 LLC ZIMMERMAN HARRIET M 1380 RED BUTTE DR PO BOX 381 4 VIA LOS INCAS ASPEN, CO 81611 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 PALM BEACH, FL 33480 ttiquettes faciles A peler A Consultez la feuille www.avery.com Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Sens de chargement d'instruction 1-800-GO-AVER'l I,I~29 06 09 558 Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p,1 ... .. ... :gE: JACK MILLER & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING ; -r JM 90 p.hic'/.t P.O. BOX 4285 1 ASPEN,CO 81612 - 7.Â·rinf:.... 970Â·927Â·9513 TELE 970Â·927Â·8899 FAX Imiller@rof.net # Date:. 4) -2-1 low Attention: From: * Naive 4 -2 Â« t 64 44 r Â¥O.43 Namb Jack Mller Conlpany_ Â· . Office , - Fax 0 - 5-779 Fax (970) 927-8899... Phene Phone 970/927-9513 Subject Message: Alk-00 -- Al-2 u POP/Â« I I - . You should receive pages(s), including this cover sheet. If you do not receive all of the pages, please call (970) 925-3476. Original will not follow. Regular Mil Certified Mail Original will follow by: Federal Express , Messenger f I . Aug 29 06 09:56a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p.2 ATTACHMENT 2 -1.AND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: Jokn Ghrn o re Locarion: ' 248 lilu <Al-\ 0 02,1 As: p e. CO e'Â£11 (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal descriptioA whe= appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) NoT L.lorcp REPRESENTATIVE: Name: tjaGE MIller Address: 2OX 4-18 6 kre M 00 9 G 1 1 Phone #: 11 0 â‚¬27 9 4 8 PROJECT: Name: Flt# A MÂ«Â« Pop 'Â£~t Address: AD# 3. WI# 1, PiÂ·klcin Mâ‚¬-< 4 Phone #: '411 q sig TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): 2 Conditional Use O Conceptual PUD O Conceptual Historic Dcyt. Special Review 2 Final PUD (& PUD Amendment} O Final Historic Development Deaign Review Appeal E Conceptual SPA El Minor Historic Dcvt. GMQS Allotment E Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) E Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption O Subdivlsion O Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Grrealine, Stream O Subdivision Exemption (includes 2 Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane I O Lot Split O Temporary Use 71 other: ; _[] Lot Line Adjustment O Text/Map Amendment EIS Vatjanes - EXISTING CONDITYONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, ete.) J PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, Me.) I Hnve you ittached the following? FEES DUE: $ / 340 D Pre-Application Confemnce Summary U Attachment #1, Signed Fic Agreement C Response to Att,ohment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form C] Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requiremonts- Including Written Responses to Review Standards Al] plans that are Larger than 8.5" x l]" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted ms part of the application. amer- reâ‚¬22 610%' did *ff/My admift NortineS (21*3 6063,2(ft, ALÂ¢ ihib *\ 1 KN E ) /1 6 -Â¥6 2.-th G Uu)0, 0 + P+27 GhK)033 1%3NYml3d biod NlÂ¥13kl 0 - 5, ~ 1 (.) 00000 Aug 29 06 09:56a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p,3 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agrecment for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fe. CITY OF ASPEN (herein,Rer C]TY) and j/6,1 4/ m o re (hereinatter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for - *tic 049'}(30 420 (hereinafter, THE PROIECT). 2, APPLICANT understand; and agreeS that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and Ihe payment ofall mocessing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and ClTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project it is not poisible at this time to ucertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPL]CANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment oran initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional Colls lo bc billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional Costs may accnic following their hearing and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefired by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon norification by the CITY when Ihey are necessary 85 costs are incurred, CITY agrees it will be benefued through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that i[ is impractlcablo for CITY staff to complets processing or presen[ 33fficient informatiqn to the Planning Commission andlor City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current bulings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore. APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITA waiver of irs right to collect full fees prior ro a determination of application completeliess, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of S which is for hours of Community Development Braff time, and if acual reqorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings 10 CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing ofthe application mentioned above, including post approval review at B rate of 220,00 . per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be macie within 30 days of ihc billing date. APPLICANT further agrees rhat failure to pay much accrued costs sh:11 be grounds for sumpension of processing and in no cue will building permits be issued until all costs associated with (856 procossing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPUCANT By: _ By: ~~ A-~Pâ‚¬/-4>V~ 1/4.c.( Chris Bendon Community Development Director Dat ~-J 4 ZeÂ»c Bill To Mailing Address and Telephone Number: 800 128%2 A1 fe'\4 GR 0 1 -C ' 1- g:\Support\~or'nis\*grpoyn.doe 02/01/06 RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD Aug 29 06 09:56a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p.4 ATTACHMENT3 D]MENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM ptâ‚¬Â» Prlk Â¢91 1/Ule ga Du, {t,Â·,< Applicant: Jâ‚¬ok- ki\â‚¬9 RAF#96,0 4yte dohn t\Moye Location: Lot 3 Bnc 1 A 111,*t vveri v Zone District Lot Size: 771, *vlt ulap Lot Arca: 99.01 0 4 1 (for the purposes of ~alculating Floor Arda, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please: refer to the definition of Int Area in the Municipal Code,) Commercial net leasable: Existing- Proposed:_ __ 0 Number of residential units: Existing: Proposed: - 1 Number of bedrooms: Existing: proposed: B Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Eristing_ Allowable: 4 9 5-4 Proposed: 4 Â¢ 5-8 Principal bldg. height: Existing. Allowable: 25- ~ _Proposed: -24 4- 8 '~ Access. bldg. height Exi#ing: Allowable: Proposed: On-Site parking: Eristing. Required: proposed: 8 % Site coverage: Existing: Required: _proposed: % Open Space: Existing: Required: Proposed: Front Setback: Existing. Required: â‚¬ 4- Proposed: _ â‚¬ â‚¬ -Rear Setback: *cisting:_ Required: 1 0 Proposed: l o Combined F/R: Existing: Required. Proposed: Side Setback: Existing,Â· Required: t 6 Proposed: _ 10 Side Setback: Ekisting: Required: Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: . Required: _proposed: Distance Between Exuting _ Reqi,ired: _ Proposed: Buildings Existing nonconformitics or encroachments: Vanations requested: Vt 4 2 8,71 54-4 vi cle, Ma r RETAIN FOR PERMANEMT RECORD 1.11â‚¬ COE 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department To: Jack Miller From: Jessica Garrow Fax: 970.927.8899 Pages: 6 Phone: Date: July 28,2006 "rt 8 12'NO(# ji Re: Land Use Application for P&Z Review CC: [] Urgent 1 For Review O Please Comment D Please Reply C] Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Jack, Attached are the forms you will need to fill out. The deposit should be for a Minor Review, which is $1,350. If you have any questions or problems when turning in the application update, please let me know or have the folks helping you come get me. Have a great weekend! Jessica ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF ASPEN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEE POLICY The City of Aspen, pursuant to Ordinance 57 (Series of 2000), has established a fee structure for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. Referral fees for other City departments reviewing the application will also be collected when necessary. One check including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for Administrative Approvals which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. The fee is not refundable. A deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required, as hours are likely to vary substantially from one application to another. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Several different staff members may charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Staff time is logged to the case and staff can provide a summary report of hours spent at the applicant's request. After the deposit has been expended, the applicant will be billed monthly based on actual staff hours. Applicants may accrue and be billed additional expenses for a planner's time spent on the case following any hearing or approvals, up until the applicant applies for a building permit. Current billings must be paid within 30 days or processing of the application will be suspended. If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. In no case will Building Permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. When the case planner determines that the case is completed (whether approved or not approved), the case is considered closed and any remaining balance from the deposit will be refunded to the applicant. Applications which require a deposit must include an Agreement for Payment of Development Application Fees. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party responsible for payment and submitted with the application and fee in order for a land use case to be opened. The current complete fee schedule for land use applications is listed on the next page. ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2006 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES CATEGORY HOURS DEPOSIT FLAT FEE Major _ 2_ 12 2,700.00 i IMinor L 1,350.00 Staff Approvals 3 695.00 Flat Fee 546.00 Board of Adjustment 258.00 Exempt HP 00.00 Certificate of No Negative Effect 225.00 Minor HPC 3 670.00 Significant HPC <1000 sq. ft. 6 1,350.00 Significant HPC >1000 sq. ft. 12 2,700.00 Demolition, Partial Demolition, Relocation 12 2,700.00 Substantial Amendment to Approved Certificate of Appropriateness 675.00 Appeals - Base Fee 675.00 Referral Fees - Environmental Health Major 376.00 Referral Fees - Housing Major 376.00 Minor 196.00 Referral Fees - City Engineer Major 376.00 Minor 196.00 Referral Fees - Parks Major 376.00 Minor 196.00 Hourly Rate 225.00 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development .Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1 APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ which is for hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: By: Chris Bendon Community Development Director Date: Bill To Mailing Address and Telephone Number: g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 02/01/06 ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: PROJECT: Name: Address: Phone #: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): U Conditional Use U Conceptual PUD gl Conceptual Historic Devt. E Special Review ~1 Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) E Final Historic Development D Design Review Appeal U Conceptual SPA U Minor Historic Devt. U GMQS Allotment U Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) E Historic Demolition U GMQS Exemption E Subdivision U Historic Designation U ESA -8040 Greenline, Stream U Subdivision Exemption (includes U Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane U Lot Split U Temporary Use El Other: U Lot Line Adjustment 0 Text/Map Amendment 2 DS vanor(et EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description ofexisting buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ E Pre-Application Conference Summary U Attachment # 1, Signed Fee Agreement U Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form E Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. fomer mtor 6, cjldmI--0*/Oudmift *0Â¥08(6 *6033.20- AÂ® 1%\50*moic) 1 8 49--thOt ta.,4~ : 0-t- f423 ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Proj ect: Applicant: Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: Proposed: Number of residential units: Existing: Proposed: Number of bedrooms: Existing: Proposed Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: Principal bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: Access. bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: On-Site parking: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Site coverage: Existing: Required. Proposed: % Open Space: Existing: Required: Proposed: Front Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Rear Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined F/R: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: Required: Proposed: Distance Between Existing Required: Proposed: Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: I '-'8 06 11:358 Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p.1 .. ... .. â€¢â€¢â€¢ Â· ~ JACK MILLER & ASSOCIATES .. ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING i ,T 1 . 1 RO. BOX 4285 i ASPEN,CO 81612 ~~*Â· -,ji~i~~ ~ 970-927Â·9513 TELE 93441 ~t'le'lv-jot ; 970Â·927Â·8899 FAX j miller@rof.net ' DateÂ·. . -7 / 1 3 l 0 4 Attention: From: - Name JU Â¢77 459 51(- rkie,4 .' NamE . Jack Miller Office .... 2- ) Company Fax . Far (970) 927.8899 Phone. 411 - '3166 Phone 970/927-9513 Subj ect Message: 3-4 1/1-4. *U. ,114 h Tuvv,l M Oy' f: \Â«Â·- 9-0 Vct 4 t 4Â·0 f.4.ce- U U L-2/ 00-f -th VÂ¥!\ 4-(*Oll-,\6(~ -1- 1~01 Vi~~2 0 4--9-9.tvl 9 94 Ve-4.1. L/ U.)(22 create 3 -loA j./ij:tt-G? pe LOÂ«oyiâ‚¬j vâ‚¬-tiounc ul<:*11. t.. ..4 i--b bi-2 M/2/ f * /10/ 14 L/1 J -7 El,01 'Fj,51 l/22 0(5 -7~0 -~-Du? Plc,Pr kA 6/ ouer- 1-1,0 {41 H. 6 - 63 3 joncla -&Â«*c.ue e- M : 2Â¥1 4 0 941 vok<34 all 60/ivic;, vU Ove U.3*\M d,-Us (0 j You should receive Â£ pages(s), including this cover sheet. Ifyou do not receive all of the pages, please call (970) 925-34,16, 74 Original will not j-ollow. Regular Mail Certified Mail Original will follow by: Federal Express Messenger 44-'f ;752'46 4 /62 406~9 60;:f 'AN/i U:bf ta?fk. 4-0 1 c le*v +1/+ Ce,j 6-C# Ok AÂ·Vt J 51 3 4~ 9-cr\ a LO 0Adjuj. 2 4 1-ke p n nc,i p j r,-1 u f. 04 - h-u 14 0,-A 9.1-y jEE. ,\ h 40 1*CAi U c h 9.9 1.I(f~*ff f v,*.Rf --- .~ . 7 . N *D k 2 1- 90 llc' 4 -. 1 -: 1 jf n \ \ . 11Â£ \4 34.- f 1 -22'1: t C 4248 75~r 1 . 1 - 1- 0-1 I N 0 Ff14 \ . k..< - kIn tfl-Â© - Â· 11 54 -7- 1 \ \Â«% 1 J t 14 Th 1 - 0 C \ h . 1-1 1 J 1 f 1.- 1 1Â« 1 1 \ l 601 1 ' IN -0. \ i / .. 0 N \- T A. u i )'l 1. 1. 4 4 '' .7 1--= 1 - r i Â·19 7- 1 1 1 111 1 i 1 4.-L---1 \07 Â»*22.-l-- t- 1 , - 11~ U w lt- 5 -<' Cl,-U ~ I 1! t...-1.-- h 4 I 4/ 1' 1./ 5 j '4 3 I Jul 18 06 11:36a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 Se'r 0 ABL3, r . 0 Fll Â· f r 1 9 14 4 \ /4~ , 1 -41].-- I -Â·Â· Â·.1,Â·r:r .---/-' ..,r --I---, --2...*., ...& 9. 1 .--G- -' & 11 - .--+9 - Â·-.(eâ€¢=Â·â‚¬-=24---.-4-.,1 a -. 1 . 7~21 r. v---- r ===:C-,42.- 4 / <71 Â».Â©1 3 LID q . . 1Â»1 Â¢2 ..r-t- . -,- i-#str Ult C --...IG I. 1 9 \'rei:P 1, K J 1 g ; fJ 9,9.89<+4r-- , (J 4 - ' Â· Â· I .I L 7 A . , \veâ‚¬=r- a-z-Â«C (33 7. . A/* 1 Jul 18 06 11:36a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p.3 . fM---'*--7 . 0 -,-7 1 %,L...u.-',.==~i;3k..,c=,2.4 1. 11 , 51 K n.1- r'-mz--EN'*zr . --*--1 i j Â·l 11 . I r --/..2- -.==. 73\44,4.1- & 4-1 f- .1,,4:Â·â‚¬~ -1 -- 4 -1 1 -2 41 A L \ i ,\ .----------e----r ,--------Tr--ir, 47_- *_w ~ Â· L__-__3('Le_--l.&.. 62. 79 1 - h y Z \11 r " 1 : C.-Â·2 5 l 11 1_02 E24 ru--U 4 <.A /1 : 1.. \--/ 7.91 1 A -- '*~~~~---t~~NT=Â»-.-tâ‚¬24=-F"4~\i~~,-VP",~,1 (~Y~i- ~â„¢~- , 02.17 f-rter=FÂ¥' 11*'e-09~; -'~ *-4.-- -'..2:--.- 17 - 0 -#2<Â·Â¥ IN--Â·, '~hÂ· , r --- -4' '}T-'~~ $6... .71~&* ..1. LA 41251 ' 7 '. m ' 4/ , /1 PV.) - - --60 Â£43 +a . V *** 04 2 Jtf '51 4..,PL.,0- ...h -.....-ef701 k. - Â· %- - - ..Â· Nal. -r ... ./.- I. - 15 ~..~ P~TALNck:Â»4:&Â¢r'.~ 7 .--Â» ., 1 Jul 18 06 11:36a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p,4 7Â»i A - - Nl h<- 4 1 . 04'u)]r<.u 4. 1 Â·77 UP t -. ' L )~fiO~~6~~4~44 C. LO \ . - ~ -- N C l,/Pr* 4 401 24 4. \ 1 , 4 --t =,u...1 9- , 8& 62 Ald,4/ C - 1 4Â» k / 2 1 #1. i L k 1 1 li .L -- - ' A,t -1 -r I 1 // , \ 1 1 /94 6. 1 \ 1 7Â·ellik ai \ 4 9 -21 1- -L j 1 1 L-& 1 -till . 0 Nulti - I 1 A 'i- 11_,7 I 1 01> 1/ 1 /7\ 9 U lutZ 11' : \ - f 44 64--b 814 l ea AL#70 aÂ·j l 1 - i i k Jul 18 06 11:36a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 0 n 4.u i--7 19.4 . I 4 Pe?* -I-Z--2-1*0, 44 -,L Ab~ 4 9 -4/ /1 4 \X Plat wop 1 ic-/1T/*.flrÂ«~~r-'fit- 1 du' 7 1 1 1 1 54 M 7'F-- Ir-t--1 - Â·Â· Â· -23_i- 41% 1 -u-111 -*-fli -L-JI--&-....JL 6_,G.Ur-*9..2.r- - .- M ..... . 1 .-1 ... Â£-H p* I _,BZSEES'ty.-2 M.........L'.h.- ......4 -~t.*.a -'~'Li,~ ~ ~ ~ - A-.4,4--- --1 . 11==UNâ€¢â€¢-~-~ ...'44/29=250-7-tlt:7., VI - 4 , -'*. .'-* - 7//,-.....4/,â€¢:hek*42-=r.. A .-4.:.t R.a- . ..*Ct- Â· "'in' Â·rÂ· 7-g;~~~F'- 6/ .1 1 - r 1 9- 12< 4 jUÂ£Ull>-1' 0Â£-2411 -6. '*71 1 -pÂ©*rj 'L'.'31Â¥â‚¬ 1 - r Â£ - ' ~i~ L t * U~ 1 L_1__121,Lit U /1 1 . - /2 D 14' , i , n Y 1 K .) 1 â‚¬77-[ a 1.- .1.1/ ; 11. - 1 -.-; 1 6~ ~- 14-1 L iMACL mr . i .. 11 .... Â¥1* 1 1 - 23-1135&1/1 -2441 - 341 1 E--15 . '11~ve-.~~~~~ ... f-(1151 I .7 - 22*TED. 11: 2-w .. :A fr'-c~Z-/.- -/9 94 pow 4 #Nv*-17â‚¬.3 Â« -I --*-'.... A. .-- .....- -- ---------*.....---====.--.,-----~-------- 0.401 -' 1 = <~4 ferl uli - - - -= 11 / I - 1~45)67- Ece./, t~ = M' -â€¢46/, -11 69 yÂ» â‚¬CD 61 *01â‚¬ (~ -i .*. N Jul 18 06 11:36a Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p.6 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department r . To: Jack Miller, Jack Miller & Associates From: Jessica Garrow Fax: 970.927.8899 Pages: 3 Phone: 970.927.9513 Date: July 7,2006 Re: Pitkin Mesa Variance Request CC: C] Urgent m For Review O Please Comment E Please Reply 0 Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Dear Jack, Per our conversation, attached are some general staff comments regarding the Pitkin Mesa variance application. Administrative variances will not be granted for the existing design. You have the option of moving forward with the existing design by taking it before the Planning and Zoning Commission for review. The other option is to modify the design based on our earlier conversations and on the draft staff comments below. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 970.429.2780. Bept, /7 Jessica MEMORANDUM TO: Jack Miller, Jack Miller & Associates FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planner I RE: Pitkin Mesa Duplex Residential Design Standards Variances DATE: July 7,2006 SUMMARY: Jack Miller & Associates, represented by Jack Miller, has applied for a variance to the Residential Design Standards to construct a new duplex on the vacant parcel located at 1150 Cemetery Lane. ZONING: Moderate-Density Residential, R-15 REVIEW PROCEDURE: A development application for 3 or fewer variances from the Residential Design Standards shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to L.U.C. Sections: 26.410. 020 D. REQUEST: Jack Miller & Associates ("Applicant") has applied for Residential Design Standard Variances for 1) garage width to living area width; 2) garage set back; and 3) main entry setback. BACKGROUND: The applicant has requested to build a duplex at 1150 Cemetery Lane, parcels 273501314001 and 273801314002. The lot (15,942 sq. ft.) is in a triangle shape and has steep slopes along its northeastern boundary. The lot does not have access to an alley, requiring garage access directly from Cemetery Lane. The applicant requests three variances for the duplex. These variances address setback and width requirements for the entry area and garages. There is no pedestrian walk in front of the lot, but there is a bike path on the opposite side of Cemetery Road. STAFF COMMENTS: The following are Staffs findings in regards to the variances being requested by the Applicant. Variance Requested Garage Width. Section 26.410.040 (Cla) On the street facing facade(s), the width -A# -r' a El-*r of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the 1*0 -'Clic width Of the garage or carport, - /4-X -0 Â»- *Xts' 1 DRAFT Staff Finding: The duplex includes a two car garage for each unit. The width of each garage is 22 feet, making the total garage width for the structure 44 feet. The first floor living area is twenty- five (25) feet in width. The garages are nearly double the living area width, greatly exceeding the standard. Although each unit is required to provide off-street parking spaces, they are not required to be provided in a garage. With an alternative design, the garage width could be reduced or better mitigated even with the site's slopes and shape. While the lot does include steep slopes, the design does not utilize all space available on the lot that is not in steep slope areas. Variance Requested Garage Setback. Section 26.410.040 (C2b) The front Jacade of the garage or the front most . supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least tenfeet (10' 0") further from the street than thefront most wall of the house. 1 1 Staff Finding: As designed, the front most wall of the house is the garage Ayâ€ž6 1 4 3 f Â» for the northernmost unit. There is a porch element that is three (3) feet forward of the actual garage wall, but a I l _ i_ /\ porch element cannot be considered the front most wall of * - X + -> X. 5'-~ the house. The applicant states there is not sufficient space for vehicular circulation unless the garages are forward o f the living area. There are a number of areas in the buildable portion of the lot that are not utilized, and an alternative design solution could be developed to better meet this standard. Variance Requested Entry Door Setback Section 26.410.040 (Dla) The entry door shall face the street and be no more than k# 11,3> tenfeet (10'0") backfromthefront most wall ofthe , building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight feet. Staff Finding: V. .10 ./ ,44 ,Â·9 lul l. 9/ 4' / There are two entry doors on the duplex. The applicant t / 441 proposes using each unit's front most wall, rather than the building's front wall to measure setbacks for this standard. As defined under the definition of building in the Land Use Code section 26.104.090, building), the garage for the northern most unit is the appropriate faGade to measure from for each unit. The southern most unit's entry has a setback of twenty-one (21) feet from the front most wall of the structure. Staff does not believe this conforms with the intention of the standard and does not believe the site's conditions (triangle shape and steep slopes) compel a variance from this standard. There is available space in the lot's buildable area that could be utilized to better conform to the standard. 2 DEAPT 44* Copis - Pitkin Mesa Duplex Residential Design Standards Variances 'n-AL in APPLICANT: ----YY' Jack Miller & Associates, on behalf of YE Il, LLC -UL ru,v r~v v w * ien LOCATION: 1150 Cemetery Lane ZONING: Moderate-Density Residential, R-15 REVIEW PROCEDURE: A development application for 3 or fewer variances from the Residential Design Standards shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to L.U.C. Sections: 26.410.020 D. Applications requesting more than 3 variances shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission. REQUEST: Residential Design Standard Variances for 1) garage width to living area width; 2) garage set back; and 3) main entry setback. BACKGROUND: The applicant has requested to build a duplex at 1150 Cemetery Lane, parcels 273501314001 and 273801314002. The lot (15,942 sq. ft.) is in a triangle shape and has steep slopes along its northeastern boundary, creating site-specific constraints. The lot does not have access to an alley, requiring garage access directly from Cemetery Lane. R-15 zoning requires a front yard setback of 25 feet, a side yard setback of 10 feet, and a rear yard setback of 10 feet. The lot size allows for 4,976.52 square feet of floor area. The applicant requests three variances for the duplex. These variances address setback and width requirements for the entry area and garages. In the application, the applicant discusses the duplex as two units. In the application, surrounding conditions are outlined and visually depicted, illustrating that the proposal is consistent with adjacent structures and the immediate neighborhood setting. The applicant states there is no pedestrian walk in front of the lot, but that there is a bike path/bridge on the opposite side of Cemetery Road. STAFF COMMENTS: Garafre Width Each garage is planned at 22 feet in width, making it in compliance with L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C. The total garage width for the duplex is 44 feet, and the width of the porch areas total 25 feet. The applicant states that due to site constraints, the main floor living area cannot exceed the garage widths by 5 feet, as is required in L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C2a. 1 The intent of the garage requirements outlined in L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C is "to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic... (and) to minimize the presence o f garages and carports as a lifeless part o f the landscape." Staff believes that because the total garage width is almost twice as large as the living area width, the frontage reads as one garage. Staff feels, therefore, that an Administrative Variance cannot be granted. While there are site specific constraints, the plans indicate some unutilized areas on the site which are suitable for development. Staff believes the plans could reasonably be altered to better accommodate more living area width. Additionally, garages are not a "by right" in this area, indicating to staff that some of the garage width could be eliminated. Garage Setback The applicant states that site constraints prevent the duplex from complying with the requirement that the garage be set back 10 feet further from the street than the front most wall of the house (L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C2b). The garage for the southern duplex unit is set back 9 feet from its Entry Poarch, and 20 feet from the Entry Poarch for the northern duplex unit. The garage for the northern unit is set back approximately 3 feet from its Entry Poarch, and is approximately 8 feet forward of the southern unit's Entry Poarch. As with the garage width, staff believes these characteristics contribute to the front faGade reading as one garage. Again, staff recognizes that there are site specific constraints, but that there are areas suitable for development which are not utilized in existing plans. Garafre Loading Because this lot exceeds 15,000 sq. ft., if the garage is to be forward of the front fagade, it must be side-loaded (L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 C24 The application indicates the northern most garage is in front of the forward wall of the duplex and is front-loading. The application does not request a variance for this issue, though one is required. The fact that the garage is not side-loading contributes to the appearance that the front faGade is one large garage. This situation, in conjunction with the other garage issues, makes staff uncomfortable granting an Administrative Variance. Main Entry Setback The applicant has requested a variance for the Main Entry Setback. L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 Dl a requires the main entry face the street and be set back no more than 10 feet from the front most wall of the building. Because the duplex is one building, the setbacks for each entry must be no more than 10 feet from the front most wall, in this case one of the garages. The entry setback for the southern most unit is approximately 20 feet, and the entry porch is set back approximately 8 feet. As discussed above, the entry setback contributes to the feel that this building is dominated by a garage. Staff feels the actual door constitutes the main entry. This variance request in conjunction with the others, creates more than three, disallowing Administrative Variances from being granted. 2 . Street Facing Principal Window L.U.C. Section 26.410.040 Dl requires a significant principal window face the street. On ~~ the main entry door, but staff feels this constitutes part o f the door area, and is not a the main level, there are no principal windows facing the street. There is a window next to principal window. This further contributes to the feel that the building is dominated by a 444j garage. A variance from this standard is required. As discussed above, because there are more than 3 variances, Administrative Variances cannot be granted. Setbacks In R-15 zoning, a 25 foot minimum front set back is required. Plans indicate the porch area extends into this set back area. An 18 inch encroachment is allowed, but staff feels plans do not clearly indicate the encroachment meets this standard. 1273 A 3 Exhibit IS JACK~ILLER & ASSOCIATEL ARCHITECTS - PLANNERS POST OFFICE BOX 4285 TELEPHONE (970) 927-9513 ASPEN, COLORADO Â§1812 FACSIMILE (970) *27-8099 May 31, 2006 James Lindt, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Pitkin Mesa Duplex Residential Design Standards Variances Dear James, Please accept the attached documents as our application for the described variances. As mentioned in our report, each entry sets back less than 10 feet from the foremost wall of each unit, respectively. We believe the proposed design could be determined by the staff to conform with the intent of the entry setback requirement. If so, there are only two variance items to consider. Even if the staff determines that the entry setback variance is required, the number of variances will not exceed three (3). We therefore request Administrative Variances for the items since: There are "not more than three (3) individual requirements" and our report demonstrates that the proposed development is consistent with 'adjacent structures" and lhe immediate neighborhood setting." In addition, we believe this would be fair due to the "unusual site-specific constraints" also described in our report. Thank you for your assistance. Please contact me in the event you have any questions. Sirkrly C JacFMillel, Architect 124 Miller and Associates, Architects ris PROJECT: PITKIN MESA DUPLEX LOT 3 BLOCK 2, PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SUBJECT: REQUEST TO APPROVE VARIANCES FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: 1. GARAGE WIDTH 2. GARAGE SETBACK 3. FRONT ENTRY DOOR SETBACK â‚¬ AI - 5/41%22. 1 m. 62 ..5- 3#7'4':C. 11 1 III j K i :C 1, .'FAT i I. .:r ....4 ' - 4 1 Â¢94/*.. j *~---LL,t L PROPOSED DESIGN Elmore Variance PDF Friday, June 02,2006 PAGE 1 OF 12 n -SUBJECT PROPERTY lAR Â¥ V.â€¢Â· .4 5.â‚¬ -4 b 2(A-1%1 4%. 87% 401 .f 7.!~ di'P '1 ha'. ./4:7 % 224 24 ~ Mounta , le, - G 'llÂ· Â· Dr 21 9 5,0/.tÂ·Â·- I. V 'P Â®t D-'40 1 = . I a g. A.swer 3%a~E Â£ Go I Course_~ .... ) (#>ib e . T, <P a u f @* W G'c:=ve St kv,.0 ./Pr./. 22. N S ' 1.(0-82 -//I. Triangle 2 2 4 9 OF Park 2 < 4 f g + .*a...St R W EÂ·'eeker s! 4, 9:erke, St Maronn Crock Rd < 2 65 q RI - 2*99 E VV Ma,'r, S, - C 58 , Â® 2 4 W HOP: 1 --45% - 94* b A -% . rE Etâ€¢ Â£9./'r As pen Variey 14 #-t,Â·Pr,* A.â€ž GB As Hospital -C - 0 4 E c /3 01-6 '''Waglif 0, , Parc Dnu -1 +L.4 E- 9:ra. 4%9 9 @2006 Google - Map data @2006 NAVTEQT,9- 1 9?093%; 2. e VICINITY MAP & KEY TO PHOTOS Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 3 OF 12 197 1 Are> . 0 1 . t'.9 *J"pow Lake Ave Shain, 'Â·P '9 419 N GENERAL DISCUSSION OF ISSUES The subject property is not a typical rectangular shape, inner city lot of relatively flat terrain nor does it have access to an alley in the rear. It is an irregular triangular lot with a steep slope along the entire northeast boundary and is located in the outer perimeter of the of the city, adjacent to the Pitkin County boundary. The combination of the shape of the lot and topography makes conformance with the requirements, listed before, extremely difficult if not impossible. A significant number of existing buildings in the vicinity have the same, or similar, problems and do not conform with the regulations. Photographs of these structures have been provided for review. GARAGE WIDTH Due to the shape of the lot and absence of an alley there is no alternative to direct access to the garages from the street. Given its location in the outer perimeter of the city the site is not subject to the higher pedestrian traffic an inner city lot would have. In fact, there is no pedestrian walk in front of the lot only a bike path/bridge on the opposite side of the road. The 22 foot individual width of each garage conforms with the maximum width of 24 feet, however, given the site constraints the width of the main floor living area can not be 5 feet wider than the garage widths. The 25 foot setback from the street further restricts the width of the structure facing the street making conformance with the garage width to living area width requirement impossible to achieve. Other buildings in the vicinity have had the same problem and do not conform. We have provided a porch roof at the offset (stagger) between the 2 units connecting the front entries. We believe this serves to increase the apparent living area frontage and reinforces the one story element GARAGE SETBACK & FRONT ENTRY DOOR SETBACKS We have combined the discussion of these two variances because they are related. The combination of the shape of the lot, topography, building area restrictions, desirable building massing and property setbacks limits building layout options for a viable design and lead to the offset of the fronts of the 2 units. There is not sufficient room on the site for vehicular circulation and the garages must front on the street Other buildings in the area have similar problems and our proposed design is consistent with existing structures in the vicinity. We request a variance from the garage setback requirement Each entry is less than 10 back from foremost wall of that unit so that each unit does conform with the entry setback requirement on an individual basis. The only entry setback issue therefore is the setback of the entry on the right as it relates to the walls of the unit on the left (as viewed from the street). This is a result of the offset between the 2 units. We believe the proposed design conforms with the spirit of the requirement if not the letter but request a variance to the entry setback requirement if it is deemed necessary. Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01,2006 PAGE 2 OF 12 ..:4 4Â· -&09:-I Â· .râ€¢, - r-- Â·Â·1.<3,.~,1.-Â·:. ... ? 7<- rf f . 9/1 >lk ./ 4%; Â·Â· -24 J . 4 21.: .. 4 3 THE GARAGES DOMINATE BOTH BUILPINSS. THE ENTRY OF THE UNIT ABOVE STEPS BACK TRICE FROM THE GARAGE FNALL ANO THE ENTRY BELOR APPEARS TO STEP BACK MORE THAN 10 FEET. IN THE BUILDING Bet-OR THE LIVING AREA MIOTH IS MUCH LESS THAN THE GARAGE FYIPTH. - L . # *t.**r . ./. . A Br 7 :I:t 9 H - 44. -.~ *j '23 2 1,â€¢24}J. f.' â€¢L.1 li ..Â· ~r - .... ./ 1 129. Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 4 OF 12 f - , 3 4,4 j'-Â·044 ./.U/./.5#B//64.0-/Â· ' micâ‚¬42' 5Tt/.c m~ 11-4 W- I r-@ 4-2 ' 4 614. VE< 7221?e.:-WR - Â·Salkabw#W lisylillilibilliligiS .'lliat /4.i/*Ili,/ 11/KJ/W~/*/19* 2 ,-4 /*0,~ =Ut . - Â¥11" . 1:u /1/1 1 : 21- â€¢ -ts, W -42144:â„¢.~..t THE ENTRY STEPS BACK FROM THE GARAGE IN BOTH PHOTOS. 4 -U.4.. . : . .51 U" 4.11 1 J. ./4 '3- , mil - H-~ *0.-*- Â· u.r.- -r. I --:- 1 35 : -4 4.:/.1 .1 Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 5 OF 12 ill- .,0/ ... ... *53~ 9421 - ilr~ - I M,<t. .//i 1 - . I 4 , ./ 4 ........... 0 . v 9 - Nimule ~- ........... k ~- jh<P THE ENTRY STEPS BACK FROM THE GARAGE IN BOTH PHOTOS. DOUBLE KIPE DOORS ARE USED FOR BOTH GARAGES IN THE DUPLEX SHOWN ABOVE. -fit/"#I c 47. - k . . , .y**L Â· I : '. 9 1 . 2* ' *rk 1 k, r 1 r -i : I. - 1 Or.4 1 Â® Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 6 OF 12 1 4 If : a. .9 . /. , e. 4 Lt. â€¢ L . 1% 0 # : 7 . ' r.- It- Al< Â«0 ' . 1 1 7 ill ~1=-glmf i t.,r- / /:'4 M.#2..'e .MIÂ· 4.-4,Â®Â·Â· .' '. -. - THE GARAGE ABOVE COMINATES THE ELEVATION ANC> RHILE THE GARAGE BELOR SETS BACK IT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM RIOTH OF 24 FEET. . .4. h , k Â·-4 i f .4Â» _ 44. . 7 - V J Il-122 . , t..9.-.0.1~t--701â‚¬=* 5,1, - 1 Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 7 OF 12 . .,1Â» I.~'14.,#'~ Â·f/.t: K --Â»4- 2 7 7 -16 , ,â€¢t ?*/i~.'I~' 1 .e 1 ,1. *~ t?kbile#IA: Â¢ Â· t ... - 449/..S 4 : - - *3 4 w 4.1 .7 4-- - THE GARAGE POMINATES THE BUILDINGS IN BOTH PHOTOS AND THE ENTRIES ARE SET BACK FROM THE GARAGES. IN THE BUILDING BELOR THE GARAGE IS WIDER THAN 24 FEET ANO INCLUDES A DOUBLE MIDE POOR PLUS A SINGLE POOR. I. ./ 11 40. I r.... . .. . 9 -r p - . - --~ Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 8 OF 12 r. 1% .... 4 'lit '. . ..... 4 I 79Â«1 p i . K I THE GARAGE IN THE PHOTO ABOVE le KIPER THAN 24 FEET, HAS A DOUBLE MIPE GARAGE POOR PLUS A SINGLE, ENTRIES STEP BACK FROM THE GARAGE AND THE LIVING AREA FRONTAGE MIPTH IS LESS THAN THE GARAGE FNIOTH. THE ENTRY SETS BACK FROM THE GARAGE, WITH DOUBLE MIPE POOR, IN THE PHOTO BELOR. 4, Â£ -7 '% . 9 1 V 7 .1 -1 ' m 142-4 t. 6 , ..6 U 1 41#/ t â‚¬ -1.2 1 Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 9 OF 12 ' j.1 4 . - + R - ~.1 - 9-*A... THE DUPLEX ABOVE APPEARS TO BE ALMOST ALL GARAGE FRONTAGE ON THE MAIN LEVEL. THERE IS NO 1 STORY ELEMENT EVIDENT. THE UNIT ON THE RIGHT STEPS BACK FROM THE UNIT ON THE LEFT. BELOA THE ENTRY SETS BACK FROM THE GARAGE. . 4 .t .. 'A *...7; , 1-- . I .4 . /4.... 'r '. . - I -0% . 1 2 4 . 5 4 9- ;02, f I â€¢ - Fk 3 1-Â· 84 Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 10 OF 12 7,.1, r , I ./ R A I 2 4 1.-1 I. . 4 - C - 7 IV ,*' d Ak .-r .r .1 '1 t,L 4 A b - I + i â‚¬ . .. : ' .4 .~ ~ . /.4 8. - 1, . . f.,fi, 5 . . i.. 1 THE ENTRY SETS BACK FROM THE GARAGE, IN BOTH THE PHOTO ABOVE ANC THE PHOTO BELOR. ' $ .r be $ I -,1/Il--/.25~=.1..$-. - fr.. A :\11--11-=L-1.6 .1-:'- ER., -7- 31Â· WE Â·. -- ~ ~ -447. Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 11 OF 12 .: W.-- i, , 'r , 4 ; '4 9. i #24 : . 4 4 .ER ---,-'.9-------r---â„¢ - *.- :62.- 1 4*:tic.: 2..0 2, - ~*11%9ff@V Â·1<92#A.-43-3Â¢,+ --- ~ THE ENTRY SETS BACK FROM THE GARAGE FOR BOTH UNITS OF THIS DUPLEX AND ONE GARAGE SETS BACK FROM THE OTHER. Elmore Variance PDF Thursday, June 01, 2006 PAGE 12 OF 12 CITY vF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER; James Lindt, 429-2763 DATE: 4/20/06 PROJECT: Lot 3, Block 2, Pitkin Mesa Subdivision Res. Design Variances REPRESENTATIVE: - Jack Miller OWNER: Elmore TYPE OF APPUCATION: One Step. DESCRU'TION: Residential Design Standards Variances. The Applicant is requesting several residential design standard variances to construct a new duplex. Because the Applicant requires more than threo (3) variances from the residential design standards, all variances shall be reviewed by the Planning add Zoning Commission. Land Usâ€¢ Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410.020(D) Residential Design Standards: Variances Review by: Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hoaring: Yes, before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Referral Agencies: NA Planning Fees: $1,350 Deposit for 6 hours of staff planner time (additional hours will be billed at $225 per hour) Total Deposit: $1,350 To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for Review. 2. Proof of ownership. 3. Completed Land Use Application- 4. Signed fee agreement. 5, Completed Dimensional Requirements Form. - 6. Applicant' s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authbrized to act oil behalf of the applicant. 7. Street addroid andlegal description of theparcelon which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a GlitÂ·reut Cortificatil fiom a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing thu namej ofall owners of tho prbilerty, axid kill inorlgages, judgmentv, lions, casements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, aild demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Developmont Application 8, An 8 1/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the paicel within the City of Aspen. 9. Improventent Survey. 10. Proposed Site Plan. 11. Proposed Elevation Drawings and Floor Plans. 12. Additional materials as required by the specific review. Please refer to tho application packet for specific submittal requirements or to the oode sections noted above. 13. A writtetilicscription of the proposal and an oxplanation in written, graphic, or model forut of how the proposed develi)imit:nt compti,Â·,3 with thi; i'gvic,9 31:.'ti~dard?i rulcvtmt to thÂ© devulopÂ·niont application. Please include existing Coaditioits as Well us preposed- 14. 1{)3~opied o f the oomplete applioation packet and maps. Additional copies may be needed if application needs to go t}ic Plamiing And Zoning Commission for review. HPC = 12; PZ = 10; GMC = PZ+5; CC = 7; Referral Agencies = 1/ea.; Planning Staff= 1 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding ob the City. 1-he Rummory is basell oIl cummt zoning, whiob is subject to chsnge in thc future, imid upon factikal rel usent;itio,1.9 that mmu :rtily,int be NurA,I r..Wâ€ž 1.11( 8,11),u)'iny. Y (tolÂ·), 111,1 w lileÂ· it ]Cf,Al or vested right. Land Title Guarantee Company Date: April 01, 2005 YE n, U..C, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABIUTY COMPANY P.O. BOX 381 WRIGHTSVILLE, NC 28480 Enclosed please find the title insurance policy for your propaty located at 1150 CEMETERY LANE ASPEN CO 81611 The following endorsements are included in this policy: Deletion of Stwdard Exception(s) Please mview this policy in its enthety. In the event that you Bad any discrepancy, or if you have any qUeStiODS xegarding you[ final title policy, you may contact. Title Department Phone: 970-925-1678 Fax: 970-925-6243 Please refer to our Order No. Q386144 Should you decide to sell [he property described in this policy, or if yon are required to purchase a new title commitment for mortgage pmposes, you may be entitled to a credit toward future title insurance premiums. Land Title Guarantee Company will retain a copy of this policy so we will be able [o provide future products and seIvices to you quickly and efficiently Thank you for giving us the opportunity to serve you. Sincerely, Land Title Guarantee Company Â£0001 .telsgouÂ¥1384Â§-flimole.!01:TE ZSCI 609 016 XVi TI:II 9003/90/90 SELLER-OWNER FINAL AFFIDAVIT AND AGREEMENT RE: Commitment No. Q386144 Escrow No. Q386!44 State of Colorado, County of pmaN RE: Real property and improvements located at: 1150 CEMETERY LANE ASPEN CO 8161] in che County of PITKIN State of Colorado, more panicularly described as follows: 032 EXHImIT 'Aâ€¢ AMACNED ERRETO Ag MAD; A PART MERZOr Whereas, Land Title Guarantee Company has issued its Commitment No. Qj36144 covering said property, The Undersigned, Owner-Seller of the Real Estate and improvements located on the herein described property, being first duly sworn on oath, for tile purpose of inducing Land Title Guarantee Company to issue its ALTA Policy of Title Insurance, in connection with the property described in said commitment, do hereby make the following representations to Land Title Guarantee Company, with full knowledge nd intent that said company shall rely thereon: 1. That those certain persons, firms and corporations, including the General Contractors, and all subcontractors hired by or under contract with the undersigned who have furnished services, labor or materials, according to plans and specifications or otherwise, used m connection with the construction of improvements on the real estate herein described, have been paid in full. 2. That no claims have been made to the undersigned, nor is any suit now pending on behalf of any contractor, subcontractor, laborer or materialman, nor any other suit of any kind, and that no chattel mortgages, conditional bills of sale, security agreements or fwancing statements have been made. 3. That, except as shown in the above-referenced commitment, there are no liens or encumbrances of any kind, recorded or unrecorded, affecting the subject property. 4. That there has been no architectural service or Other work of any kind, contracted for or otherwise ordered by the undersigned, within the last 120 days, paid or unpaid, which could.establish a priority for any future mechanics' lien claimant. If services or other work has been contracted for within the preceding 120 days, undersigned is Iequired to attach a description of same with the corresponding payment information. 5. That all improvements constructed on the real estate herein described were completed on or before Much 14, ZOOS Â· 6. That all fees, assessments and chirges of the homeowners association having jurisdiction over the above described property, if applicable, are current at [his time. 7. The undersigned further understands that the payoff of any liens, mortgages, deeds of trust, etc., is based on written payoff figures obtained from the lien holder and agrees that, in the event Land Title Guarantee Company is notified by the lien holder that the payoff is insufficient to render the loan paid in full, the undersigned shall, upon notification by Land Title Guarantee Company, immediately tender the amount of funds necessary to complete the payoff. Â® There are no existing leases or tenancies affecting said property. ~ If any deed of trust recorded against my property secures an open line of credit or a revolving line of credit, I/we affirm that I/we have not drawn additional funds from the line of credit since the date of the payoff statement from my/our lender to Land Tille Guarantee Company. I/We further agree and affirm that I/we will not make any further draws on the line of credit after the date of this affidavit. 1/We further affirm that ]/we have not taken out any loans against our property other than those shown on the above referenced commitment number. In light of the foregoing facts and representations, the undersigned, in consideration of the issuance by Land Title Guarantee Company of a policy of Title Insurance covering said property iii the manner described by the undersigned as set out above, hereby promise, covenant and agree to hold harmless, protect and indemnify Land Title Guarantee Company, and any title insurance company that has issued an ALTA Policy of insurance pursuant to the commitment described above, from and against those liabilities, losses, damages, expenses and charges, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees (including attorney' s fees in the enforcement of this agreement) and expenses of litigation arising out of any inaccuracies in the above representations. Seller(s) Forwarding Address: Ouro SAVINGS BANK liZ 1 C-0711 AVZNUX CILEV*LAND 02 44114 A - 4 : u p- *V' 7 rwW DAVID L. YA,K, ~al~r. Ira, PRE,ZAENT U STATE OF 66,h COUNTY OF C q , 440 6 9 The fopegoing instrument was acinowledged before me on this day of March 14. 1005 , by olv:rp L. rattz, A,jr. vre, puung,- 0,00:0 SAVIN"-*mi h .- a Â· My commission expires: a-Il-.6009 f Â·... --, ../j~~Â£*f- 3-7)- 641/-40-041-, Witness my hand and official seal . '.-4*'Ablic ror= 412 Arr. SELL 44,4,;;,7'i~fi.,7.1 . (B/~ LIli=ag g i *41*4 ; State of Ohio <ff,~~*Â§~/ My Comm Exp. 02-11-2009 '00[Pl 101990Â¤87Â·1049 IMMOAe.IomIR ESCI 809 OIB XY:! TI:IT 9008/90/90 ' 6 4 . A \ .y - 1 3 3.4 2 '. ':' .-> ' *: 42..9,% -i.Â·- 'Â¢'643 '.9 Gur .4.-11': $.1 110 Â» I. ..t PERSPECTIVE IMAGE PERSPECTIVE IMAGE FROM NORTHWEST FROM SOUTHWEST THESE DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY JACK KILLER #ASSOCIATES ARCH[TECI JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS: DATE: 7/610006 SCALE: NA ARE INTENDED S.I. FOR THIS PROJECT ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING DUNNÂ· LO~ Al,K) 1.aY NOT BE ..IN WHOLE OR IN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT POST OFFICE BOX 4285 SIâ‚¬ET T HE EXPRESS WRITrEN CONSENT of THE ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION 1 Elmore DD12 22*34 Wednesday, July 19. 2006 ARCHITECT PHONEÂ· (970; 827-5513 FAX: {970) 927-8899 ~ COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO 6 I *' 4 . 94: ..~ - 4 r 71" ./1 f ... r-./ .- 4 -=-*./ 1 -. 0.9. U . - . 14+ I 6 , 9. . . '49.:Jil 3.: - . 41~L1-:* ... 7 'F.*442/3,~' 16 432 - : .; .7 f... 7 -1 7.: rt". '- -1 t. 2 . .d y.. *. #&/.4. 4 .49 ,$ - 7-2 Â· . -'./-.. ://le=/I'l.,/.r '4-1 - ... - al -t, I.# Y/p I..ff# lit:~ - 4 e Kiw"97*~MARma.JI : JI,/ M. t Ak '01--11 1--1 \ 9, * :1 1 - 1 1 . St. ' 4 ; : I. 1. 7 . ..... ..... >1 29 Â·Â· :44 , Â·A. ....bt-3,61172 2.2 Â· \ 11 ./2 ':% I. 4 ..Â·.1 ..;.9 < 7,.P \ gr -- ....--3474.-214~.).'3~~Zr 4, \ -Â· hm,6 ... - .... .. , ...... 1 11 \1141 I -2.e , 6,-1=-1 ' : 4--, .Yl = i '"' ~ lili r 11 0 --9 - 7 i H "1111111 F.- =---------------Â£ 1 Dg. 7 .UP 1 .h 35 'â€¢:=u< 2. LEO . Â·ri b., 2 tex ... 11- Â· -Â· 9'~t~ \ ----- M --------2..2.1*,~1>2,41>\ ., 6- -Tr----2-r~_1 -___ __-/..1~ mur ----------------Â·----- --- -- -- --- -- ---- -----....... 22 .......... , NORTH 0:212:CZ.;R':31*CK JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES 1 PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS DATE 7*2006 SITE PLAN ARE INTENDED soLELY FOR THÂ¢S PROJECT ARCHITECTUREPLANNING LOT 3 BLOCK 2 DRAWN la< SCALEE ,â€¢10./ ATK) 6'1'Â¥ NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN EHEt' PARTFOR $ OTHER NOJECr ITHOUT PC}S. OF=FlCE BOX 4286 THE EXPRESSWRITTENCONSENT/THE ASPEN, C0L0~00 81G11 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION Elmore D012 221[34 Wednesday. July 15, 200G ARCHITECT I ,006'ACKILLER'*SOC PHONE (970)927-9513 FAX 1970)927-8899 ~ COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO 1 1,1 1,1=}13 1 1 1 11 ~% 1 11 1 .1 11 4 11 1 GARA*# [ P 01 i 21'-0" x 21'-0" ~ 2 p 11 5-0,\5' 4 ~GleTER | - '4 , 11.-lj 2 9 .. -=b /BATH 10 I h 11 A e 3-1 /5 -4- I \ F.J U - 11 U_ 7 FOYER 1.1 CC VERED 1_~ 19'-9" x 5'-91[ MASTER BORM ENTRY 15'-5" x 13'-7 1 - --TÂ· x T-6 Â»-Lf 1 - . 7, F .Â·212 -1 k P.- -- N- STAIR 1 [EE I 400 CLOSET I - 1- 8 -â€¢ #-5 8 -0" I I -5 1 1 11. 11 Â»E 15. 15â‚¬ 116 1 -Â» . T f -U 1 1. .52- l 1Eâ‚¬ 14 10" x 4-0" KCaVERED ~2~ 11 1 11:1111 li 2 12~~.~fy#.1-a:Â£-UL--22~5'3.Z-13 F-9 1==-4 - ~ LEI :. .1 <-7, ~ | F- -U~ 3 1- 0IZE, 4===7 1 fr- 11 11 GARAGE 22--O" x 21'-O CLOSET 71-1 902 9 â€¢ MUD 11 -O" x 6'-it- -7, b'-3" x 6 -7 MASTER BORM ...=<D 0 Â»11 16'-4" X :21-0 CUOSET 0 : < MASTER BATH 7 11'-C x 10-8 1 1 1 #4.--/- 2 1~ 2 1 Il h 1=1 r 4 9 U ' 10-717 1640. I. MAIN LEVEL 1111%5;LE.2,25,2-fÂ°< JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES I PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS DATE 7/19,2006 SCALE 14'=T-O' ARE INTENDED SOLELY FOR THIS PROJECT ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING ANDMAV NOT BEUSEDINWHOLE ORIN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 DUWN Uk SHE. FLOOR PLAN THEE>PRESS WRITTENCONSENT / THE ASPEN COLORADO PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION 3 PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOU ~ POSIOFFICE BOX 4285 ~ Elmore DD 12 22 *34 Wednesday, July 19, 2006 ARCHrfECT . 200GJAU~.'LEI I ASSOC PHONE (970) 927.9513 FAX: (970)927.899 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO 9-11/8' i 6-61g- . . 34 22 D-m 1â‚¬ gil I.C I- 16. 26/ 3â‚¬ 114 1 14 5-0Â¥lf .. 74 3-1154'F Q W .1 41' 0,7 Â· ' 21 1 ~_jo . 4 --3il ' M 101 If- t--- +11 - 1 ,0 0 p-t-H 33 â‚¬ Ent 1 ff yl 1=24 LCONY GREAT ROOM 55- x 23 -C Fl i - - 39 -:4 2 O r~222-- 00 fj /1 f1 -11 -9 - - i [1 G Fj III] STAIRC _ 4 - - /0 -E - R 3/ 1 1.. . 1011[l[[1-{__70 le- . P.. r 1 6-7 . R EELEA_ ......V-- I. 9 1, A- . . i 'ZI= U nmn 4 4 L k.f \ C Uuu L1 LBALICONY -2 Â·Â·â‚¬ I 23~-'7' 4 Ul n U == c."Eo b 1- 17/ 1 18 2- ./. iâ‚¬ 8-33/4'+ SECOND LEVEL MLLER AND ASSOCIATES ARCH~ECT SCALE WM'/ THESE DOCUMENTS PREPARED 8Y JACK JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS DATE 7/.00E ARE INTENDED SOLELY FOR THIS PROJECT ARCHITECTUREPLANNING DRAWN: La< ANOW,YNOT BEUSEDINWHOLEOR IN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 .... FLOOR PLAN PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT POST OFFICE /0.4285 THEEXPRESS WRIUENCONSENT IF THE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION 4 Elmore DD 12 22 x34 Wednesday, July 19. 2006 ARCHETECT . .DIJAC.......ASS'r PHoNE: (970)927-9513 FAX: (97)899 ~ COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO .u -----T **228322****28*22#*2~****832*82*BE*****23*28*~*23*5*2~52Â¥28** 22/= ..1--- "4 =--m 1 1- 6 0 brUPL~ilf//~;6~*11*jlbIL/~-~Af*-0-a. --z=.) -. 0-2.---#-..-/:-- --1. --- â€ž 111111 lilli 1 4 11 1111111111111 lilli '40.:ilm/3-~1i1illk:'31I:dili~~1:it 11 b--al. i - --4 11 i U 11 3 --~ - ..=le.râ‚¬9,--,â‚¬-4-e 1-1 -1 ......4.9./.........0- ;9,s.3,41*'4~41&'.96-:ib,124,41Â»7Â¥4" I. '2.,6.4.Vi.22/4..~.i/6.6 P#TE-,i#-=-31-'EF---=-5 =54*~A e. 151,519**kit/~-Il:'~1~'fl'.& 1.0.......r.0, BE-â‚¬41-6--.-2-----.-ff- = =g=3=28*EGE=- a. ligIiE~SEâ‚¬~--21~EE-EESJ-5~flifi-i#f-lift*-491--MiTZE-liHili~ili-#Ill-.gril--- . - 22=BiEi Â£1-5-t&/= -.......r imrp&-2<<&*2*24#//2 2 9%- f~ Â£ 1V~ =gagip#3*E*~===-- T.~M ':mlli~: A . . I. ................&...."..........4*82%=a*: ... . I - .*Â·. . . . . .. -â€ž ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: V )P .2 3 1- 4 C_ Location: tyS O CQ, r. e ru 4- a. fin te)Â· A-20 (Indicate street address, lot & block numBer, legal descriptio~where 0ppropriate) Parcel ID#(REQUIRED) 1.0 4 8 6 b c it 1 '91 4\< T 0 Â¥14â‚¬5Â¥k Sol & : u , sic u 21-35 613(4001 /2-1~s-01-3@ CO-1- REPRESENTATIVE: Name: .:31..k Yh~, 1 1 4- TL Address: 9.0.-gax 4 2 9 S (3. F+Q-* T \ 61 j Phone #: 9 n o- 927 99 s 13 PROJECT: Name: 3):4\0~ PAA:&,g/31.fle-A - --10\nOF)<1=-f- r-7 Address: C. D.'Rot '&81 \01((ci\2*sville --E e.,0 c.1~j,OÂ·CÂ·~irqg-A Phone #: 93 b-379-nags- TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use C Conceptual PUD U Conceptual Historic Devt. Special Review ~ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) U Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal U Conceptual SPA U Minor Historic Devt. GMQS Allotment U Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ~1 Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption U Subdivision E Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ~ Subdivision Exemption (includes U Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane U Lot Split U Temporary Use Lai, Other: U Lot Line Adjustment O Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ U Pre-Application Conference Summary U Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement D Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form U Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must b~ibmitted as part of the application. RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECOR, 000000 E.... ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: Applicant: Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: Proposed: Number of residential units: Existing: Proposed: Number ofbedrooms: Existing: Proposed: Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: Principal bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: Access. bldg. height: Existing: Allawable: Proposed: On-Site parking: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Site coverage: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Open Space: Existing: Required: Proposed: Front Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Rear Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined F/R: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing. Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing. Required: Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: Required: Proposed: Distance Between Existing Required: Proposed: Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Pavment of CitÂ¥ of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staffto complete processing or present sumcient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a dqtgrmination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ MA 9 which is for 3> hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CrrY OF ASPEN APPI~pChfITCh &42 4 19. i i --' chds Bendon Community Development Director < Date: .94 0 6 ~hminfjddresMnd Ielephonallumi~i REUMit:*d R .80>< .3<9 1 00Â·/gfl tfwi L Le feack A/C g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 8 -1-9 7 9,55 2/01/2006 RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD 1 5 L 1,10 mil 1 1 1 1 , 111 1 111 1 1.4 + lilil ple :'10 flfÂ·<rord Navlgate Pgrff, Report' For!)-ip Lab Melp r. 22 Y,- 4 Â· 3/1 F ./.r.; Â·.Â·â€¢20, . ; Â·,e Surnr//2 Act Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·4 -:11.,1.- 1, 11: luly :Peirrit Type 3-ilÂ· ~ ..'-Â·i.â€žrl. Lke 20ul Femt 17 Â·Â® ri..Â·1:'30Â·Aull Address Â·:Â·.-Â·22'.Â· Â·. Â·Â·Â·k.tiSlUG u Art/Stme 101 F- - . City +SFEN State CO - 24> 816,1 t 2 Pe:Â·Â·Â· ~ ird. mat.on 2~ Fc,~Â·ing DueÂ·:, 4 Id.16 *phed 02Â»21200; Majer Femw : Pr-1 2 Status :<Â·r,2,i,g Approved Deer .ion ALSO #14. .,LEKING VARIANCES 1=ued Filial .-*-,-- + 91â€žbmitted :,~'~K MILLER Ei-Â§*3 Ckk Ramr,Ing Days 0 E,*10 06/01$2089- --1 11Â¥lnef PO BOX 381 1 Las~ Name a MORE Il Jor[ ; A 2| Fic Name : , MEIGHTS'2LLE BEACH NC 28490 Phone 6 / Owneil:Appkant' Applicall Last Narpe ,..1 'ORE It JOHN A 2, Fist Name IPO BOX 381 â€ž,.â€ž-.--<- . *RIGHTSVILLE BEA.CH NC 29480 , ;44, Phone I Ci.el # 24584 < lendef Last Name I Z Fgs,Nanne 5 Phone i ErÂ¢ei the rr in *re o: he pem# addte r ..11 Recotd 3 0, 41 , r . 1 1 I. 0 411 4 1 . 4 1,11 11. IP 14,/ ~, Ill 1 - '111 4 . fic' 1 91039 qei INVOICE tyler works. Eden Systems Division Tyler Technologies, inc. INVOICE NO. PAGE 4424 Page 1 of 1 EDEN Division P.O. Box 678076 Dallas. TX 75267-8076 INVOICE DATE 5/5/2006 Phone: 425-254-1400 Toll-free: 1-800-328-0310 Fax : 425-254-1402 SOLD TO SHIP TO All software provided by Eden to the Customer. including the programs and related doculnentation, are confidential. trade secrets, and the proprietary property of EDEN Systems, Inc.. Any unauthorized w examination, modification, replication, recompilation. transfer, reverse engineering, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. Â«91/Â¥I-Â« \ % I C. ..1. Fkge 60 Pw<el Ae,i 000 20 9% 5439 8483 . 40 0. . 0 94 37 97 6060 44>\ 2 20 01% 30 C% 887 ./ 7960. A \ 7779 47 1 e. 4 \ Â«44 ..00 4 \?b Â£ .\451 \ h \ 1 -0\ \ - I \ \\ 1 \ Â£ U,-0394= B 36'00" R= 544.11 1 L= 57.64 CB= N 14 47' 0 0 ' W 7789 99 C= 157.09 GAZAG< Â·' ~ \ L__ :~ P d '' i.:I. W:Ae-5. 1.L ..p..7.*.fll:* NX \ F i f-Â» .l *--3-- Nes 1 i: I. : .. l , 5.-9. : 00/825 MASTER 52â‚¬M f \TNX740:- \ ; 1 . 1 02 /â„¢52 t 1 1 i 5\â„¢v 1 FovER J 4 . Fil Q-=4*1 Ill} 7792.47 - e - --'7-?eg,-.~~// 1 ~,3 212, h iIi M I e: .1 HASTEâ‚¬ acil \ , GA~,~682 -4 D i 2 ...8-2. SAT. Â· I I 1/ Â· _1 i CP 7792.20 i. ' 0 3 151 1 \\ \ d 0 \ j O ' S90 00'00" W 175.86' 1 7797.66 , Or 6, l . 7792.99 NORTH ' THESE DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY JACK JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS: DATE 6/22006 SITE PLAN AREINTENDEDSOLELYFORTHISPROJECT ARCHITECT U RE/PLA NNING DRAWN LCK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT. SCALE: 1 =10-0. AND MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 SHEET L PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT POST OFFICE BOX 4285 2 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Elmore DD11 22x34 Friday, June 02,2006 ARCHITECT. â‚¬ 2005 .ACK MILLER & ASSOC PHONE: (970) 927-9513 FAX: (970) 927-8899 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO M .00,93 90N I f -1 111 I 4 4. ah 1 , 1 -_ 1 tq-~ --0 to11 - /Â» 1 1 - -- 1 A i --- GARAGE f It /1 I 2110" x 21'-08 9 1 SHOMER MASTER fl -- w. _- 1 /1~ j 4'-T x 7 -011 / BATH 1 1 1 1 91 44 L ..--I , ' 9'-9" x 5-4"-- r-\\ 1 j LINEN 1' ~ i E L-U 1 - 1_ Ii-- COVERED \Nal N MASTER BORM ENTRY 47 15'-5' x 1371" !41 11 --7- Ff-==1 -454 LL LEI 11 / 7-1 5 -CPEN BELO 4~17" x 3,-74- : yup ~ CLOSET 1 1 1 1 6'-01" x Â¢1Â·-5, 6 -O' x '-5 1-- 1 1. -- ---- - IM 0 le --331 --1 - hi f UP z2-6-1 1 6-0' ~ c ~ ' 15'-0' ~ SÂ¢*11%-. ~ _~ * ~ I 14'-10Â¤ x 4'-O 261-0. 1 1 1 1-1 1 -1 1- 4 1 - 2 Z COVERED -~ ao ENTRY MOYER. 6 8 41 1 7 22'-11" x 4'-5" Â·, 1-6-1 9 LIN r p 4. e-r1 , 1 / 1 / 1111 4 1 1 1 1 \ -' 03 Lf L=- 1 GARAGE 1 CLOSET k 1 1 1 221-0,1 X 211-0" F < =[I.-2 L E- 1- MUP l'GO" x 6'-11" - 2 1 6-3" X 6'-T' - ---- - -- MASTER BORMI 1 4 1 A 1 1 | CLOSET A LINEN Â· 1 1 1 16'-4" x 21'-O" w 6 -3 X 2 -0' Â· -- --- . < Fl __p 1\ 1 'C MASTER BATH [ 1 , 111-0" x 101-3" 7 ' 4 i ! 1 - fyi, 1 X - 4 C U --- -3 1 Oblit A â„¢ 4 Ill ~--- ~ i _ n ' . r Â· -- Ii I / , ... .--- =12.==22=2===1-3==L.....'.--~d A. -rf----- 25 r L .m.. 13-0" 10'-7 17 16-101/7 58'-6 MAIN LEVEL MILLER AND ASSOCIATES. ARCHITECT, JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES ~ PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONSÂ· SCALE. 1/4-=1'-0 THESE DOCUMENTS, PREPARED BY JACK DATE 6/22006 ARE INTENDEDSOLELY FORTHIS PROJECT ARCHIT ECT U RE/PLA NNING AIR,8.' DRAWNÂ· LCK LOT 3 BLOCK 2 AND MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLEOR IN FLOOR PLAN THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WlTHOUT POST OFFICE BOX 4285 SHEET PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION 3 Elmore DD11 22x34 Friday, June 02,2006 ARCHITECT. 2 2005 jACK MILLER & ASSOC PHONE: (970) 927-9513 FAX: (970) 927-8899 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO 9'-11/8' + 5'-73/4' -111/8' -It- 2.9 68'-71/4" 22-0 ' '.0-.1 .On,6 161â‚¬ 2614 .- 31-0 1 1 1, 7-6- . - B'-O ,' - 2*-6 J 5'-01/I6'~ s t c 10-4- - <3-11546: ZE E-7 ___2 , 1 T LODL-r i LI I! 1 - Â·Â· -- -/U - '10Â»111. -".--11 ~ 1 0 i ~-70 -Tn -11*49 1 L 9 1. Tr 1/ fi -u 2, 1 !Â£ - L E--3 2 1 -11 i<-<.~ i_~/ G~ -1' 1 9-- 1-i f t ; WI r-* I .--4 EL * 11 6 6 U- - 1 1131= 2 b r -BALCONÂ¥ BATAI - GREAT ROOM 4 22 -7 X -O -4/ C=-2=12 11 1 Eli - -7--- ... A -2 7 El m [3 8 31 -' 33-7- - - DN - -~ V 1 2-1 ~ 7 7 , d r.------ -- 44 ~ 1 -4 W 71 , STAIRd 3 3 - _-- L__--- iul r . ... I I 't ./. /,1 fi 11 1111 : 73 3 1 1 1 g --'ij--- ~ 1 ' '-----------------------Â·--,i 23-: , < 3-01â€žÂ» 1 111 !3 2'-18. -1 10'-4_ _ . i .2-0 _31 W #|L 1 1 -1 '11 3 1 ~ TOILET -- 4 ' 1 2, -0 X 3'-6 4-- 1__1 | , OPENI BEL.OW 6--t--~-r..IL-2--2- --c e-_- ~~___ ~~~;~~p==-=;====*=-ur-je~2- --_~___ _ , - -ON - -1 nn r7 r<' -- 2 gr rn Â· -==1 - 30' 1 1--- 09 12 ~ ~ 8 LJ \Il H ' I- k BALCONY e==77=/ i 4 A . ele Ffr f_=T-zpq~ 1,- ~11 b 1--.4 %-1 rea 11 -- - 1 1 1 1 Â» L_3 -1 7 0 0 A-0 1-- - 01 7-7 1---3 t 1 P ---4 I ~teÂ·ff 4 1.11 P. 1 R ---1- 27-80- --.--- --- -24-8-4---- -8-3 3/4+--4 SECOND LEVEL MILLER AND ASSOCIATES. ARCHITECT. SCALE: 1/461-0 THESE DOCUMENTS. PREPARED BY JACK JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS: DATE 6/20006 ARE INTENDED SOLELY FOR THIS PROJECT ARCHIT ECT UR E/P LA NNING DRAWN LGK AND MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 SHEET FLOOR PLAN THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 4 PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT POST OFFICE BOX 4285 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION Elmore DD11 22x34 Friday, June 02,2006 ARCHITECT. : 2005 JACK M!LLER & ASSOC PHONE: (970) 927-9513 FAX: (970) 927-8899 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO EL a r- -111 A - -SESE---1---r -- 3-3 Â·Â·3Â·-:37= Â· - -t==12~=ES--*V _2.-1 -- - -Â· -_2_ f. .. Â·d iÂ·.Â·927 Â·.33. 0-- -Â·- -1~- 7--LI~7~ 2~ Â·Â·Â· -7-:9321- =:1Â·â‚¬-=miÂ· --EEPE-= _- _ â‚¬22-1 EE EE EE -__=-EBEE=BE EL Â¢2*121 ,El NE. - O E -1.9.21 0 n --omil QiÂ® E Â®m #m Â®[D U[[IB Â®ID ~ -I*11%11111'E 11111~1-11@~31111111111111111 00 2 1 1%11*'.. 1 EU - 4-cjic 1- 68 WEST ELEVATION -_ -_1=-zl Â·-112_2112217=ZE===177~-7-Â·- - -- - ------------- -- - 1--. 1 - -- - -h - -- t ~ -- -Â·---Â·----Â·i Â· Â·-Â·Â· ------r-- -:- -Â·- - ---- ----1 - . U 0 001 23 lILi F TE/2133....2-%5 1~--353=3.1.-4 -I-Â»f~~ Â·Â·~ Â·Â·-:Â·-22_-tk- h .1 U -< 0 L Ill ~ELSEEADAOACOU~~APREPAR~BY~ACK JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONSÂ· DATE: 6/2/2006 NORTH ELEVATION AND MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 SCALE 1/461'-0 ARE INTENDED SOLELY FOR THIS PROJECT ARCHIT ECT UR E/P LA NNING 37&Â·/i': I,Â·Â· j.t.1 DRAWN LEI< â€¢ PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT POST OFFICE BOX 4285 ::34Â·.. Â·.4 i SHEET THE EXPRESS WRITTENI CONSENT OF THE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION 5 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO Elmore DD11 22*34 Friday, June 02,2006 ARCHITECT 1 2005 JACK MILLER & ASSOC PHONE: (970)927-9513 FAX: (970)927-8899 .91/11 0-,9 .91/5 0-.t - .91/5 9-1.E 41 - HI 1,1 ---=n-==I ===-===========r- - J -1.---3- -z= //1 1 \\ Â·Â· r-T- 1 r.%/ - -- - th 19 FER Â»g - r r-J n < v it LEd ~ 3 EAST ELEVATION . U.- I -..I+~Â· - / F ---Â·- Â·Â· Â·Â· Â·Â· -- --. .. -.. -- I.+ I -I- -- -- - - -2~_~ -rrul=--=-3-2~iA -ni_cz:~-HEL--r.22-222.JEE-Â·--irÂ·- ~--~â€ž--m---_- i.... -:_Â«~ .~ .~3-:~_1 J - Â·Â· - -3 --I- 3-=22 ---IN-~UIP--3-~J -EF-EEJ-=3-Â«fÂ¢-Dz--9-~U..2.-23~-1153-175-3432.--ZIERFÂ«~=rf:PUCIi---. ~ L.ZEd_--~2 r.-Â· :--r,EE-'---4--FE-tr.7.91.-1- J -7-,2-1 -1---EE-1--1... - --r-ELD.-1--iG - â‚¬ r :61~Fit -{--:L-- --i-fe=1~ f-Â·-i --I.--7..â‚¬-2.-1-Lk:j--2.Â£--"-1-16 -. * 1.-=--.1-2.=:53=.62 --UE=--~Er/E-1--~--- '- ~Â·- --- -IT-2~3-31_ _ -F-rE-Cl--- . - ,. ... . ----- - -- --- -- ---- - 12 -. -I .-- -, *- . .-- -- EBEEE - BEEE E J ? l 4 1 1 It,) 1 1 THESE DOCUMENTS, PREPARED BY JACK JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS: DATE. 6/2/2006 MILLER AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT, SCALE: 1/461'-0. SOUTH ELEVATION ARE INTENDED SOLELY FOR THIS PROJECT ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING DRAWN LCK AND MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT POST OFFICE BOX 4285 THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION 6 SHEET Elmore DD11 22x34 Friday, June 02,2006 ARCHITECT. Â© 2005 JACK MLLER & ASSOC PHONE: (970) 927-9513 FAX: (970) 927-8899 -,nÂ·'>Â· COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO / i.2.9- 9 \ 4*4,13.~ 0, 0 0-567-5/ .Â·Â·; ~ .A.Â«Â·Â» t.''~ , 1 V#:' I-' 2 -.'- r:J,J...4.-92....3~ 1 J / |' #9 =I 4 'j -- bill' 'lluy -- - --'r: .-7.7TE--2....7-Â«L~---i_Li -_ - 2-- 1 -----.-Â·:-45/8--teÂ«=r __ ---3-1, + '7 ~-L= = \ 34 0-11 72-1 222\- X 1- :f--% 23- J 1 2 4 f _u --ma----==-=--- - . r - ~IT~71 -*---J /L-_ L + H==1% -6 41 1 L_ -02 1 il- -C- -A-=1 i i 1% i 1 i FYA -~"f ..2:1 ..51...2, - ..It-f:t-=---Â·-#--1--/.1~-2 -:- C = 3.i--4.> : -- -- -1.,-tB 4 ff -K-7/4 - i 1Â§b .-- - '~ 21121 1 1 1 1. i 9, ]10 - -- - - - 1,1 /114% 1 lili 6.2..1 P 111 ..:11 111 L '4Â·4Â· 4 , 1 141 -i 1 J 1 11 1719 --=yl".-64. 177?r ..,6,",i , f 1 1 1 1 J' '1*444~ #Â·'. '' 4j'' 1 1 - ~ ~~' L_1Â».,- PERSPECTIVE VIEW THESE DOCUMENTS. PREPARED BY JACK JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES ~ PITKIN MESA DUPLEX REVISIONS: DATE: 6/2/2000 MILLER AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT, SCALE AREINTENDEDSOLELY FORTHISPROJECT ARCH ITECT U RE/PLA NNING DRAWN: LCK AND MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN LOT 3 BLOCK 2 SHEET PART FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT POST OFFICE BOX 4285 THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION 7 Elmore DD11 22x34 Friday, June 02,2006 ARCHITECT. Â© 2005 JACK MILLER & ASSOC PHONE: (970) 927-9513 FAX: (970) 927-8899 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO exhibit U I T 2% h U: t to - - M <62 UPDATED IMPROVEMENT SURVEY Z 00_1 28 5 N w-ZE 6% 31 Q :@ai LOT 3 BLOCK 2 PITKIN MESA SUBDIVISION PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 58 BA m w Vism* ZO N Z 05*1 "14 A- ALSO KOWN AS DOUBLE SHAFT CONDOMINIUMS PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 563 -In: 0 2 522 ~ 2735-013-02-010 CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO 65 g s NE ZIN .1 4 cpop / ~ -jul>< REBAR AND CAP O<w L.S. #37935 / 0 (SET) m l $665 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ GRAPHIC SCALE \ 1~ (D \ S 9-79 7%2 - ( IN FEET ) \ EDGE OF ROAD 1 inch = 10 %, ~Egn g \ Â¢ IMOON modE 0 2 \ 0- g \ Z _ 00 10' UTIoTY t .. IMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENT 0 84 #m EASEMENT ~- PLAT BOOK 3 PAGE 58 ~ - 0 10 Z 14 09 -4 2735-013-02-012 ENGINEERING, INC. FOR JOHN ELMORE. 1 FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE Â£ am Fe 1 HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY HIGH COUNTRY Â£ ~ ~ ~ ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE, JUNE 1 2006 EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE . J M 0 M ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO e m Q- <\ PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF 1.1 -,0 002 ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBED PREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING 111 Ko OR ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANY PART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED, ARE 1 SHOWN HEREON TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, 1 FURTHER STATE THAT THIS 4 rn -9 SURVEY WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT, THEREFORE, ANY 8 = 16*36'00" ~ i EXCEPnON TO TITLE THAT MAY AFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN RESEARCHED Z ME 12 1 R = 544,11 / BY HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. (9 1,4 0 R 8 Z K.8 g/l Z CB= N ~-7~3 / ~j~ d.ov~~~=~~~ 11, la~N -E E BY: JASON R. ~IL~ E.S. +1~*d35 ~m 0 . &3 - K.C,60~,JI'/88 )- EW W LOT 3 '%294Â£ LAND-â€žtip Z :12 E 15,942 SQ. FT.* g GAS METER M #/6..............â‚¬~.4;y ~ZZZEZZZ#17 0. 111 n. 8i r-UTILITY STUB â‚¬ Gy, \ <1 I 4 9 .9 7-4 1 e 4 -<1 4 7 \ V 4-1 V 9 q 4 V GRAVEL PAR*NG 4 AREA V <2 + 9 /91Â« 17 4 < 7 / Vg 034 4 4 4 \ 17 4 9 â‚¬ 9 4 9 NOTE: -% 1 9 1. BABIS OF- BEARING FOR THIS SURvEY IS A BEARING OF S90*00'00"W BETWEEN THE ~ - w"33 <0 SOUTHEAST CORNER LOT THREE / 45 REBAR IN PLACE AND WITNESS CORNER TO THE ~ gV SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3, A 15 REBAR IN PLACE AS SHOWN. REBAR AND CAP ~ LS. #37935 71 00~ l I. 9 ~* pp~ ~~~~EYRnw~s sAuIL CIEC:Z ZNZICI~ pLAT (SET)-1\\ ~ /// ///~ LU I Ill <t EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR IN PL' -E / 4 1 GRAVEL PARKING k -11- 4 9 WW . AREA ~ BOOK 3, PAGE 58 AND THE RECO DED PLAT OF THE DOUBLE SHAFT CONDOMINIUMS PLAT <1 14 9 . 4 7 9 7 9 4 g li BOOK 4, PAGE 563. 4 9 4 4 7 4 9\\ REBAR AND CAP za 9 g 4 4. THIS SURVEY WAS DONE WITHOUT HE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT, THEREFORE, ANY ~ 9 4 ' 1 L.S. #16129 Ild 0 9 9 <7 99 00 EXCEPTIONS TO THE TITLE THAT F.- '.Y AFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN r (31 0 1. 4 I 9 .GRAVEL DRIVE <7 1 4 4 9 - RETAINING WALL RESEARCHED BY HIGH COUNTRY E' *GINEERING, INC. Vg - N 9 4 4 9 S 02'39'00" E 10 5.16' 00 4 .4 Â»l , 5. THIS LOT IS SUBJECT TO THE CIr OF ASPEN'S SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. <t <7 9 9 4 O.Â©j <1 175.86' 1- <7- V ic O 4 3; 90'00.00" \AL . 2735-013-00-007 - O ---0---94-- A A A , A X 11 A A X X =r .1 X 2 X X * A >i 7797,66 6 DATE OF SURVEY WAS DECEMBER 004 AND MAY 25, 2006. #5 REBAR -~ ~ L le REBAR (BEARS N90*00'00"E 1.92') 4' WIRE FENCE- L- 3" WOOD FENCE 3" WOOD FENCE L RETAINING WALL 1 EDGE OF ROAD PROJECT NO. 206170400 0922 1 NOnCE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGA ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY MTHIN THREE YEARS i :R YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION GAS' UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FRI 'HE DATE OF: CERTIFICATION 910-1 HEREON. 30NVAC 3-LS 3nN3AV )1Â¥-113 List 1 NOONSHBaNn NOISIAEIH 31Va 'ON 00Â·VOL [ 18 03 NadSÂ¥ El 1 08 00 NIVi (89 39Â¥d Â£ 3008 17-ld) 4 4.4 A3AhinS iN3 W Dhic{W[ aE!1Â¥ac[fl