Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.860 Roaring Fork Rd.0003.2005.ASLU City of Aspen Community Development Dept. CASE NUMBER 0003.2005.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2735-12-1-04-013 PROJECT ADDRESS 860 ROARING FORK RD PLANNER CHRIS LEE CASE DESCRIPTION LAUDER EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS HORN INC 925-6587 DATE OF FINAL ACTION 3/23/2005 CLOSED BY Denise Driscoll Y17.1 :111°° ( si C :Al 'el nuts ``-.Li i. Eve edit Record I lavtoate Fgym Reports Format tab tielP . t i 0 . _ Q » . L I i l $ . . 7 • 1 51 ( } f`1 ' , N 4 ry c1 171 to ti Jump 1 „ (_11 Cigar .l1 . Routing History 1 Conditions 1 Sub Eermits j Valuation 1 Public Comment 1 Attachments Main 1 Routing Status 1 Arch/Eng 1 Parcels I Custom Fields 1 Fees I Fee Summary 1 Actions Permit Type " Permit U 0003.2005.ASLU A Address 1860 ROARING FORK RD J Apt/Suite City 'ASPEN State 1C0 1 Zip 81611 j Permit Information -- Master Permit' J Routing Queue raslu Applied 12/28/2004 J Project 1 A Status !pending Approved —fil Description LAUDER EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE Issued —J Final J Submitted'DAVIS HORN INC 925-6587 Clock Running Days 1 13 Expires 101/05/2006 J r Visible on the web? Permit ID: ! 32481 Owner- - - - Last Name ER A First Name GARY&LAURA 188 MERCEDES LN ATHERTON CA 94027 Phone w Owner Is Applicant? v <, > aViiii the nermit tune cnrie 1=M Rernrrl•2 nt 2 DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the 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 of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Gary and Laura Lauder, 860 Roaring Fork Road, Aspen, CO. 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number 860 Roaring Fork Road As.en CO. 81611 Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Approval for Variance from Residential Design Standards for expansion of the Carriage House Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 13, Series of 2005, Approved 3/14/05 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates(Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) March 27, 2005 Effective Date of Development Order(Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) March 27, 2008 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 27th day of March, 2005, by the City of Aspen Community Dew lopmen , D i actor.(40 i Chris Bend n, ommunity Development Director PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL 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: 860 Roaring Fork Road — Carriage House, by Resolution of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, numbered 13, Series of 2005, on March 15, 2005. The Applicant received approval for a Variance to the Accessory Dwelling Unit design standards to allow for the expansion of the Carriage House. For further information contact Chris Bendon, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. s/ City of Aspen Publish in the Aspen Times on March 27, 2005 iv CO • MEMORANDUM To: Planning &Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Director of Community Development FROM: Chris Lee, Planner OCL... RE: Special Review to Vary ADU Design Standards to allow for an Expansion of the Carriage House at 860 Roaring Fork Road - Public Hearing DATE: March 15, 2005 APPLICANTS: Gary and Laura Lauder REPRESENTATIVE: Alice Davis (Davis Horn Inc.) PARCEL ID: 2735-121-04-013 ADDRESS: 860 Roaring Fork Road ZONING: R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential) CURRENT LAND USE: Residential lot developed with a single-family residence and Carriage House. PROPOSED LAND USE: The applicant is requesting special review approval to vary the ADU design standards to allow for the additions to the Carriage House because the principle residence is non-conforming due to code changes since it received approval. SUMMARY: The applicants, Gary and Laura Lauder, request this special review approval in order to provide a more livable space for the caretaker family which inhabits the carriage house on the property. The applicants note that since the caretaker family has been living there, they have had two children and are cramped in the limited square footage of the carriage house as now configured. Consequently, the applicants wish to convert the lower level storage and office areas into two bedrooms, to enclose an existing covered stairway at the rear of the house and to add a small landing above the stairway. The conversion of the lower level to livable space will necessitate the addition of two window wells. The proposed additions are within the existing footprint and won't add to the mass of the structure. The total increase in floor area will be 120 square feet. REVIEW PROCEDURE: 26.430.050 —Procedure for Special Review Approval A. General—An application for review of a special review shall be processed in accordance with the Common Development Review Procedures set forth at Chapter 26.304. B. Steps Required: One—Public hearing before Planning and Zoning Commission C. Notice Requirements: Publication, mailing, and posting BACKGROUND: The Applicants planned and built their primary residence and carriage house in compliance with the City's floor area regulations that were adopted in December 1999 (Ordinance 44). Under that code, ADU floor area exemptions were offered; one was fifty percent (50%) if the ADU was deed restricted to mandatory occupancy and the other was fifty percent (50%) if the ADU was detached from the primary residence. The Lauders opted for both of these exemptions and therefore, their carriage house was completely exempted from the FAR calculation. In 2001 the City Code was amended (Ordinance 46, series of 2001) to change the ADU exemptions for both mandatory occupancy and being detached from the principle residence. Those exemptions were both completely eliminated. Another change to the ADU section of the code was made in 2003 (Ordinance 53, series of 2003). It required that all ADUs be above grade and detached (without a variance) and also increased the allowable size for an ADU from 800 to 1200 square feet. Based on the change allowing an ADU to be 1200 square feet, the Lauders were interested in expanding their carriage house, but realized it couldn't be done due to the nonconforming status of their house. The nonconformance, however, was caused because the code changed (as outlined above) and the FAR exemptions they initially received made their principal residence too large per the current City Code to allow for the expansion of the carriage house. Consequently, the Applicants approached City Council about their predicament. In response to their petition (and to respond to others who may be in the same position), City Council recently adopted Ordinance 35, series 2004, which allows for the expansion of floor area up to 500 square feet to an ADU of a nonconforming (with regard to square feet)principle residence. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff feels that the Applicant has met all requirements for this special review. The exterior appearance of the structure will be altered very minimally and only a small amount of floor area will be added (120 square feet). In spite of such minimal impacts, the livability of the carriage house will be increased dramatically for the family that occupies it now as well as any future inhabitants. h1 light of the fact that Staff finds all requirements to be met for this special review and that increasing the -livable space in this=carriage house is in line with the objective of providing ADU/Carriage House space for full-time residential occupation, Staff supports this application and recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission give its approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposed special review application to vary the ADU design standards to allow for additions fo the accessory dwelling unit at 860 Roaring Fork Drive. 2 RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. Series of 2005, granting a special review approval to vary the ADU design standards to a low for additions to the accessory dwelling unit at 860 Roaring Fork Drive." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria & Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Application &Plans Exhibit C -- City Council Ordinance No. 35, Series 2005 Exhibit D -- Deed Restriction Document Exhibit E -- Housing Office Letter and Emails Regarding Formal Complaint - Exhibit F -- P&Z Minutes (10/5/04) Exhibit G -- Council Minutes (11/22/04) 3 EXHIBIT A REVIEW CRITERIA& STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.520.080 Special Review for ADU or Carriage Houses The Planning and Zoning Commission may grant relief from the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Design Standards at a public hearing if the variance from the design standards is found to conform to the following criteria: 1. The proposed ADU or Carriage House is designed in a manner which promotes the purpose of the ADU and Carriage House program, promotes the purpose of the zone district in which it is proposed, and promotes the unit's general livability. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes Staff finds that the proposed special review application promotes the intent of the original ADU/Carriage House program. The proposed changes to the existing carriage house won't significantly change it in any way; it still functions as a completely separate dwelling unit with a separate entrance and separate utilities. The floor area expansion will definitely promote the units'general livability by making the lower level suitable as a living space for the caretaker family. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed ADU or Carriage House is designed to be compatible with, and subordinate in character to, the primary residence considering all dimensions, site configuration, landscaping,privacy, and historical significance of the property. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes Staff feels that the changes to the carriage house will be minor and not greatly change the existing structure. The carriage house is currently compatible with, and subordinate to, the primary residence through use of materials, placement on the lot and smaller dimensions, and this project won't alter those relationships. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed ADU or Carriage House is designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of the neighborhood considering all dimensions, density, designated view planes, operating characteristics, traffic, availability of on-street parking, availability of transit services,.and walking proximity to employment and recreational opportunities. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes The existing carriage house is an attractive building that meets the massing and character of the R-15 (Moderate Density Residential) Zone District. It fits well within the architecture of neighboring residences. Traffic won't be affected by the addition and there is sufficient parking for the unit. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Section 26.312.030 Nonconforming Structures (Per Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004) Section 26.312.030.0 of the City of Aspen Land Use shall include a new subsection 3 to read as follows: 3. Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. The only other exception to this requirement shall be for a property with a detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or Carriage House. Such a detached ADU or Carriage House structure may be enlarged or expanded by up to_five hundred (500) square feet of floor area, provided that this bonus floor area shall go entirely to the detached ADU or Carriage House and also provided that the ADU or Carriage House does not exceed the maximum size allowed for an ADU or Carriage House. The enlargement or expansion must comply with all other requirements of this Title, and shall receive development review approval as required by 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units, and Special Review approval pursuant to Section 26.430. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes This proposal adds approximately 168 square feet of expansion floor area, 120 square feet of non-exempt, expansion floor area. Seven hundred (700) square feet was originally approved and built for the Lauder Carriage House, so after the improvements the unit will be approximately 868 square feet. As 48 of the total 700 square feet were not exempt from the original floor area calculations in 1999 (for the area between the exterior and interior walls), only 120 new square feet of floor area is required for this proposal (168 square feet of non- exempt space less 48 previously counted square feet equals 120 square feet of non-exempt space). The maximum size allowed for a carriage house is 1200 square feet; the Lauder Carriage House will be approximately 868 square feet which is well under the maximum allowed. All of the "bonus" floor area requested will go into the carriage house. It does comply with review approval required by Section 26.520 (as illustrated in the review criterion above) and Section 26.430. Staff finds this criterion to be met. The 500 square foot floor area expansion may be allowed if the unit complies with the review criteria and standards of the Aspen Land Use Regulations Sections 26.520 including, but not limited to, a finding that the expansion shall be compatible with the character of surrounding uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. The expanded use shall not have adverse impacts on the surrounding uses or those impacts will be mitigated. Only the floor area which will increase the ADU or Carriage House beyond the legally created non- conforming floor area (the expansion floor area) is required to be mitigated. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes The Lauder Carriage House is similar both in design and materials to the primary residence and is very compatible with it and other structures in the vicinity. The expansion is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. The expanded use will not have any adverse impacts on surrounding uses. Staff finds this criterion to be met. If the impacts of the expanded use cannot be sufficiently mitigated otherwise, an additional method for mitigating those impacts and other impacts considered in the land use review, is to extinguish Historic Transferable Development Rights, pursuant to Chapter 26.535, up to a maximum of 500 square feet. In addition to the ability to extinguish a Historic Transferable Development Right, as discussed above, an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit, and only an ADU unit that is deed-restricted as a mandatory occupancy unit, shall have the option to apply to transfer up to a maximum of 500 square feet from a non-historically designated property that has sufficient available floor area pursuant to the special review procedures detailed in this section. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes The Applicant has obtained excess, unused floor area from another property in the amount proposed for expansion to provide for mitigation. As required, a deed restriction will be recorded which extinguishes the floor area taken from the sending site and moved to the subject property so that this floor area transferred from the sending site will no longer be available for use on the sending property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. In addition to the special review criteria in Section 26.520.080,floor area from a TDR may be approved pursuant to the following additional review criteria: 1. The additional floor area is a conversion of existing square footage which was not previously counted in floor area. (Example: storage space made habitable.) Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes With the inclusion of light wells in this structure, a portion of the basement, which is currently entirely storage space, will be counted in the floor area. The build out of the exterior stairwell, which wasn't previously included in the floor area measurement will also be included. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The additional floor area creates a more desirable, livable unit with minimal additional impacts to the bulk and mass of the ADU structure. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes There will be very minimal additions to the bulk and mass of the structure, but the Carriage House will certainly become a more livable space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The additional floor area creates a unit which is more suitable for caretaker families. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes The additional space, particularly in the lower lever, will make this unit much more suitable for a caretaker family by providing additional bedrooms and enhancing the livable space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The increased impacts from the larger size are outweighed by the benefits of having a larger, more desirable ADU. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes Definitely. The structural impacts will be minimal while the benefits will be significant. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. No variance from setbacks can be required to accommodate the bonus floor area approved through this section of the Code. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes There are no variances from setbacks required (or requested) for this project. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. The area and bulk of the ADU structure, after the addition of the bonus floor area, must be compatible with surrounding uses and the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes As previously stated, the existing Carriage House is compatible with both the surrounding uses and surrounding structures of the neighborhood. There will be very minimal changes to the exterior of the Carriage House and those will not have any impact on compatibility. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Historic Transferable Development Rights, commensurate with the floor area expansion, are extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.535—Historic Transferable Development Rights. Staff Finding: Does it Comply? Yes—Not Applicable Pursuant to Ordinance 35 (series of 2004), a deed-restricted Mandatory Occupancy ADU is not required to obtain Historic Transferable Development Rights. Owing to the fact that this is a deed-restricted Mandatory Occupancy ADU, the Applicant obtained TDRs from a non-historic source. 8. For the transfer of allowable square footage up to 500 square,feet.from a non-historically designated property to an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit, the Applicant shall record an instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney removing floor area from the sending property to the Mandatory Occupancy ADU. Staff Findin_: Does it Comply? Yes The Applicant's attorney, Gideon Kaufman, created a deed restriction instrument for review and approval by the City Attorney that is included in this packet as Exhibit D. This deed restriction will remove/extinguish the requested 120 square feet of floor area from the sending property, Lot 1A Second Aspen Company Subdivision, owned by Bermuda Properties and give the 120 square feet of floor area to the subject property carriage house. Since the Applicant's ADU/Carriage House is a mandatory Occupancy unit, the floor area will be transferred from a non-historic designated property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. RESOLUTION NO. 1 3 (Series of 2005) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW FOR EXPANSION OF THE CARRIAGE HOUSE AT 860 ROARING FORK ROAD, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-121-04-013 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Davis Horn Inc., on behalf of Gary and Laura Lauder, seeking a special review approval for a variance from Section 26.520.050, Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Standards to allow the Applicants to add 120 square feet of floor area to the carriage house on their property located at 860 Roaring Fork Road, in the City of Aspen, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.520.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Community Development Department staff reviewed the applicant's application for compliance with the Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Standards Section of the Aspen Municipal Code and found the submitted development application to be consistent with Review Standards pursuant to 26.520.050(4) and 26.520.050(5); and, WHEREAS all applications for Special Review for variations from the ADU Design Standards of Section 26.520.050 must meet the following review standards: a) The proposed ADU is designed in a manner which promotes the purpose of the ADU program, promotes the purpose of the zone district in which it is proposed, and promotes the units general livability; and b) The proposed ADU is designed to be compatible with, and subordinate in character to, the primary residence considering all dimensions, site configuration, landscaping, privacy, and historical significance of the property; and c) The proposed ADU is designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of the neighborhood considering all dimensions, density, designated view planes, operating characteristics, traffic, availability of off-street parking, availability of transit services, and walking proximity to employment and recreational opportunities; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.312.030.0 Subsection 3 (per Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004) Section 26.312.030.0 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code a detached ADU or Carriage House structure may be enlarged or expanded by up to five hundred (500) square feet of floor area, provided that this bonus floor area shall go entirely to the detached ADU or Carriage House and also provided that the ADU or Carriage House does not exceed the maximum size allowed for an ADU or Carriage House. The enlargement or expansion must comply with all other requirements of this Title, and shall receive development review approval as required by 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units, and Special Review approval pursuant to Section 26.430; and, WHEREAS all applications for Special Review for variations from the ADU Design Standards of Section 26.520.050 must meet the following review standards in order for the Planning and Zoning Commission: a) The proposed ADU is designed in a manner which promotes the purpose of the ADU program, promotes the purpose of the zone district in which it is proposed, and promotes the units general livability; and a) The proposed ADU is designed to be compatible with, and subordinate in character to, the primary residence considering all dimensions, site configuration, landscaping, privacy, and historical significance of the property; and b) The proposed ADU is designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of the neighborhood considering all dimensions, density, designated view planes, operating characteristics, traffic, availability of off-street parking, availability of transit services, and walking proximity to employment and recreational opportunities; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director, after review of the requested variances, recommended approval of the special review to allow the applicant to vary the ADU design standards to construct the additional square footage to the Carriage House; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing at a regular meeting on March 15, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission, approved by a vote of to ( - ) a special review application to vary the ADU design standards to allow for the Applicant to make a 120 square foot addition to the Carriage House at 860 Roaring Fork Road, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1 That a special review for a variance from the ADU Design Standards to allow for the 120 square foot addition to the Carriage House at 860 Roaring Fork Road, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, is approved pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.430, Special Review. Section 2 This resolution shall not effect 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 3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof Section 4 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, 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. APPROVED by the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on March 15, 2005. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk H:\chrisl\Applications\Planning&Zoning Commission\Lauder ADU Expansion Davis Horn- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING December 15, 2004 Chris Bendon, City of Aspen Planning Director Christopher Lee, Planner Aspen Pitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Lauder Land Use Application: Expansion of a Non-conforming Carriage House Structure Dear Chris: Davis Horn Inc. and Kaufman, Peterson and Dishler P.C. represent Laura and Gary Lauder who own a primary residence and detached Carriage House/ADU in the Second Aspen Company Subdivision at 860 Roaring Fork Road in the City of Aspen. The two structures on the property are non-conforming with regard to floor area as the Carriage House/ADU was exempt from floor area calculations when it was built, but this specific floor area exemption is no longer available. The City Council recently adopted Ordinance 35, a code amendment which now allows the expansion of floor area up to 500 square feet to a structure non-conforming with regard to floor area, as long as the floor area is put into an Accessory Dwelling Unit or Carriage House. The Lauders initiated this code amendment in conjunction with the City Council in order to expand their Carriage House to make the unit larger and more livable for their long term caretakers' family. This application letter is requesting approval for a floor area expansion pursuant to this new section of the Code. As required, the application will address the review criteria in the Accessory Dwelling Unit (26.520) and the Special Review(26.430) sections of the Code, along with new review criteria established in Section 312.030,Nonconforming Structures, Extensions. The application includes the following sections: I. Background; II. Proposed Development; III. Land Use Reviews pursuant to Ordinance 35 regarding Non-Conforming Structures: A. Section 26.520 Accessory Dwelling Units; B. Section 26.430 Special Review; and C. Section 312.030 (C)(3)(1 through 6); IV. Summary. ALICE DAVIS,AICP f GLENN HORN,AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH ST. • SUITE 104 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • 970/925-6587 • FAX: 970/925-5180 BACKGROUND The Lauders' primary residence and Carriage House were planned and built in compliance with the City's floor area regulations which were adopted and effective in December, 1999 (Ordinance 44, 1999). This Code section regarding floor area has since been amended and as a result, both Lauder structures on this property are non-conforming with regard to floor area. The former, December 1999 code granted two floor area exemptions for ADUs. Fifty percent of an ADU's floor area was exempt if the ADU structure was deed restricted to mandatory occupancy and another 50% was exempt if the ADU was detached from the primary residence. Together, a 100% exemption was available for an ADU that was both detached and had a mandatory occupancy restriction. The Lauder unit qualified for the 100% exemption and was built accordingly. In 2001 the City Code(Ordinance 46, 2001) was amended to removed the mandatory occupancy floor area exemption. The 50% floor area exemption for an ADU that is detached from the primary residence was also removed. In 2003, (Ordinance 53, 2003) the Code was again amended to require all Carriage Houses/ADUs to be detached and above grade unless a variance from the ADU design standards is obtained through a public hearing land use review. This amendment also increased the maximum size allowed for a Carriage House from 800 to 1200 square feet. Since 1200 square feet is now allowed and since a 500 square foot bonus is available, the Lauders are seeking approval to expand their Carriage House to make it more suitable for their caretakers' family. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Lauders are requesting approval for an expansion to their Carriage House in order to make the unit larger, more livable and desirable for their long-term caretaker family. The current caretakers have been with the Lauder family for over eight years and over that time have had two children. The unit is no longer large enough for them and the few minor changes proposed, largely within the existing footprint, will greatly increase the size and utility of the unit, without adding to the mass or bulk of the home. The Lauders are requesting the expansion to convert the lower level storage and office areas into two bedrooms, to enclose an existing covered stairway to the rear of the house connecting the main level with the lower level, and to add an interior landing above the stairway where a small nook would function as a play area. These additions (the bedrooms, enclosed stairway and floor landing above the stairway) are within the existing footprint and will not add to the bulk or mass of the unit. The conversion of existing space on the lower level into two bedrooms will necessitate two window wells in order to make the bedrooms habitable according to the building code. With the existing landscaping, the areawells will not be noticeable. -2- These three proposed improvements will be well under the 500 square feet allowed by Ordinance 35 of 2004 and will be accomplished through the transfer of floor area from a non-historic property. Approximately 120 square feet of non-exempt floor area is needed to accomplish these additions. This 120 square feet of expansion floor area has been verified with Sarah Oates, City of Aspen Zoning Officer. Please refer to Attachment 3, a letter signed by Sarah Oates agreeing to this 120 square foot calculation. LAND USE REVIEWS Please refer to Ordinance 35, of 2004 which is found in Attachment 2 to this application. Section 26.312.030(C)of the Code,Non-conforming structures, Extensions begins as follows: - - - (Code sections are in italics, while the applicant's comments are not.) "C. Extensions. 1. General. A nonconforming structure shall not be extended by an enlargement or expansion that increases the nonconformity. A nonconforming structure may be extended or altered in a manner that does not change or that decreases the nonconformity. 2. Historic Structures. The first exemption.... 3. Accessory Dwelling Units. The only other exception to this requirement shall be for a property with a detached dwelling unit (ADU) or Carriage House. Such a detached ADU or Carriage House structure may be enlarged or expanded by up to five hundred(500) square feet of floor area,provided that this bonus floor area shall go entirely to the detached ADU or Carriage House and also provided that the ADU or Carriage House does not exceed the maximum size allowed for an ADU or Carriage House. The enlargement or expansion must comply with all other requirements of the Title and shall receive development review approval as required by 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units and Special Review approval pursuant to 26.430. " This proposal adds approximately 168 square feet of expansion floor area, 120 square feet of non-exempt, expansion floor area. Seven hundred (700) square feet was originally approved and built for the Lauder Carriage House, so after the improvements, the unit will be approximately 868 square feet. As 48 of the total 700 square feet were not exempt from the original floor area calculations in 1999 (for the area between the exterior and interior walls), only 120 new square feet of floor area is required for this proposal. (168 sf non-exempt space less 48 previously counted sf equals 120 sf of non-exempt space). This is well under the 500 square feet allowed by the Code. The maximum size allowed for a Carriage House is 1200 square feet and the Lauder Carriage House will be approximately 868 square feet, well under the maximum allowed. All of the bonus floor area requested will go into the Carriage House. -3- As stated in Section C above, the review criteria in Section 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units and 26. 430 Special Review must also be addressed. These Code sections are addressed later in the application. The next section of Ordinance 35 states that the proposed expansion floor area "shall be compatible and consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone and the expanded use shall not have adverse impacts on the surrounding uses or those impacts will be mitigated. " The Lauder Carriage House is similar in design and materials to the primary residence, but is of a smaller, scale. It is off to the side and down a slope from the main residence and is quite compatible with the main residence and surrounding uses. The property is consistent with the purpose and intent of this single family zone district and sets a very desirable precedent for the development of well designed and livable detached ADUs/Carriage Houses. The proposed expansion add two areawells on the lower level, both on the west side of the House. The areawells make the conversion of the lower level space into habitable bedrooms possible and in conformance with the Uniform Building Code. The enclosing of the existing covered stairway to the rear of the Carriage House and adding an interior landing above the enclosed stairs, the unit will function much better. These will not impact the compatibility of the House and will not significantly increase the bulk or mass of the structure. Ordinance 35 allows that "one method for mitigating those impacts and other impacts considered in the land use review, is to transfer the 500 square feet offloor area, or any amount up to 500 square feet,from a property with excess or unused floor area (the sending property) to the site containing the detached ADU or Carriage House (receiving ADU/Carriage House property). The amount of the floor area expansion bonus up to 500 square feet, will be subtracted from the maximum floor area allowed on the sending property. Only available floor area not developed or utilities on the sending property can be transferred. A deed restriction encumbering the sending site shall be recorded to reflect the extinguished floor area which has been transferred and is no longer available for use on the sending property. " Although the impacts from the expansion of 120 square feet will be minimal, the applicant is willing to mitigate for the expansion and will obtain excess, unused floor area from another property(the sending site) in the amount proposed for expansion, 120 square feet. All the requirements mentioned above will be met. As required, a deed restriction will be recorded which extinguishes the floor area taken from the sending site and moved to the subject property so that this floor area transferred from the sending site will no longer be available for use on the sending property. In addition to the review criteria in Section 26.520.080 for ADUs addressed later in this application, Ordinance 35 provides that the expansion floor area from such a transfer from a sending site be approved pursuant to the following additional review criteria. These criteria found in Section 26.312.030 (C)(3) are addressed below and the applicant has shown compliance with the criteria. -4- (1) The additional floor area is a conversion of existing square footage which was not previously counted in floor area. (Example: storage space made habitable.) Most of the floor area requested is the result of the conversion of existing square footage which was not previously counted in floor area. The existing office and storage space on the lower level, which did not previously count in floor area, will be converted into two bedrooms. The addition of areawells adds very little floor area, but they are necessary to meet building code requirements for the bedrooms. Enclosing the rear, covered stairway, increases the perimeter wall area which is not included in floor area calculations, so the floor area increase from this improvement is minimal. The new floor at the landing of the stairway is within interior air space and will not be visible from the outside the unit. The proposed improvements are small in terms of counted floor area allocated to the total for the property, but they add greatly to the utility and size of the interior space of the Carriage House. These improvement are realized largely through the conversion of existing space and the proposal meets this criteria. (2) The additional floor area creates a more desirable, livable unit with minimal additional impacts to the bulk and mass of the ADU structure. As discussed above, the addition of 120 square feet of floor area has very little impact on the bulk and mass of the Carriage House. Two areawells on the west side of the House and the enclosed covered stairs to the rear are barely visible and these areas are well landscaped to eliminate any visual impacts that do occur. The proposal makes the Carriage House a much more desirable family unit by the addition of two bedrooms with very little bulk and mass impacts. The building footprint is not increased. Increasing the utility of the Carriage House from a one bedroom to a three bedroom unit is a huge improvement to the desirability and livability of the Carriage House. (3) The additional floor area creates a unit which is more suitable for caretaker families. Increasing the size and utility of the Carriage House from a one bedroom to a three bedroom unit makes it much more suitable for a family. This beautiful, detached Carriage House structure is perfect for conversion to a larger unit with more bedrooms. The current caretakers have been with the Lauders for over eight years and have helped with the plans so the unit will better accommodate the needs of their family. The enclosed stairs allows access to the lower level (and new bedrooms) without going outside. The landing gives more room on the first level where the caretakers plan a small play area. The areawells will not only allow habitable space for the bedrooms for safety and access reasons, but they will substantially increase the desirability of the space through the increased light. The same number of residents will be housed in the unit; they will have a much more desirable and livable home. (4) The increased impacts from the larger size are outweighed by the benefits of having a larger, more desirable, ADU. -5- As discussed in the above criteria, the addition of two areawells, an enclosed rear stairway, a new floor at the top of these rear stairs and the resulting conversion of existing space into two bedrooms will add immensely to the desirability, utility and size of the Carriage House. These benefits far outweigh the minimal impacts generated by the proposed expansion, which is only 120 square feet according to current definitions for floor area calculations. The visual, bulk and mass impacts are minimal. The building footprint is not increased. Any impacts will be. screened with landscaping and hidden by virtue of the stair location to the rear of the Carriage House and by the addition of an interior space which is not visible from the outside at all. The benefits far outweigh the impacts and this criteria supports the approval of the proposed expansion. (5) No variance from setbacks can be required to accommodate the bonus floor area approved through this section of the Code. No variance from setbacks is required to accommodate the floor area expansion proposed. (6) The area and bulk of the ADU structure, after the addition of the bonus floor area, must be compatible with surrounding uses and the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed 120 square foot addition does not significantly increase the area and bulk of the Carriage House. Since the exterior changes are minimal and don't affect the building footprint, the Carriage House will continue to be an asset to the neighborhood, quite compatible with surrounding uses and the neighborhood. The above criteria show that the proposed expansion is well within the intent of the 500 square foot floor area bonus given in Section 26.319, Non-conforming Structures, Extension. Even though the impacts are minimal from the proposed 120 square foot addition, the applicant agrees to obtain and extinguish floor area from another property in order to transfer that floor area to the subject property. Any impacts generated will be more than mitigated by this transfer. Section 26.520 Accessory Dwelling Units. The following will show compliance with the following design standards for ADUs and Carriage Houses found in Section 26.520.050 of the Code. 26.520.050 Design Standards. All ADUs and Carriage Houses shall conform to the following design standards unless otherwise approved, pursuant to Section 26.520.080, Special Review(for a variance from ADU or Carriage House design standards.): -6- 1. An ADU must contain between 300 and 800 net livable square feet, 10% of which must be a closet or storage area. A Carriage House must contain between 800 and 1200 square feet net livable square feet, 10% of which must be closet or storage area. The Lauder Carriage House will be within these guidelines. Much more than ten percent of the net livable space will be in closet or storage area. 2. An ADU or Carriage House must be able to function as a separate dwelling unit. This includes the following: (a)An ADU or Carriage House must be separately accessible from the exterior. An interior entrance to the primary residence may be approved, pursuant to Special Review; (b)An ADU or Carriage House must have separately accessible utilities. This does not preclude shared services. (c)An ADU or Carraige House shall contain a kitchen containing, at a minimum, an oven, a stove with two burners, a sink, and a refrigerator with a minimum of 6 cubic feet of capacity and a freezer; and (d)An ADU or Carriage House shall contain a bathroom containing, at a minimum, a sink, a toilet, and a shower. The Lauder Carriage House will continue to function as an extremely desirable, separate dwelling unit. All of these standards have been met or substantially exceeded. 3. Once parking space for the ADU or Carriage House shall be provided on-site and shall remain available for the benefit of the ADU or Carriage House resident. The parking space shall not be stacked with a space for the primary residence. The Carriage House has a parking space available for the Carriage House and it is not stacked, nor is it near the spaces for the primary residence. A driveway to the primary residence branches off and goes directly to the Carriage House and the parking space is on this section of the driveway. 4. The finished floor height(s) of the ADU or Carriage House shall be entirely above the natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, on all sides of the structure. The Carriage House is already built, so this criteria does not apply. The conversion of the lower level space into bedrooms is addressed elsewhere in the application as a request for a variance from this requirement, as is allowed under Section 26.430.080. -7- 5. The ADU or Carriage House shall be detached from the primary residence. An ADU or Carriage House located above a garage or storage area shall qualify as a detached ADU or Carriage House. No other connections to the primary residence, or portions thereof shall qualify the ADU or Carriage House as detached. The Lauder Carriage House meets this condition as it is fully detached and separate from the main residence. See the photos in Attachment 3. 6. An ADU or Carriage House shall be located within the dimensional requirements of the zone district in which the property is located. The Lauder Carriage House will be within the dimensional requirements of the zone district after the addition of the proposed expansion square footage. 7. The roof design shall prevent snow and ice from shedding upon an entrance to an ADU or Carriage House. If the entrance is accessed via stairs, sufficient means of preventing snow and ice from accumulating on the stairs shall be provided. The roof has been well designed to prevent snow and ice from shedding upon the entrance. The enclosed rear stairs better meet this criteria as well. 8. ADUs and Carriage Houses shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of this title which apply to residential development in general. These include, but are not limited to, the Uniform Building Code requirements related to adequate natural light, ventilation,fire egress,fire suppression and sound attenuation between living units. This standard may not be varied. The proposed expansion will meet this requirement in full. The area wells are to meet the requirements for habitable space, thus allowing the conversion of existing lower level space to bedrooms. 9. All ADUs and Carriage Houses shall be registered with the Housing Authority and the property shall be deed restricted in accordance with Section 26.520.070 Deed Restrictions. This standard may not be varied. The Lauder Carriage House is deed restricted and registered with the Housing Authority. Section 26.520.080 (D) Special Review. This Section of the ADU chapter of the Code allows a variance from the nine design standards above if approved pursuant to the following criteria. As a variance is necessary in order to allow the conversion of the lower level space to bedrooms in the Lauder Carriage House, this section has been addressed. The criteria are given in italics and the response are not. -8- This section of the Code states that "An application requesting variance from the ADU and Carriage House design standards, or an appeal of a determination made by the Community Development Director, shall be processed as a Special Review in accordance with the Common Development Review Procedure set forth in Section 26.304. The Special Review shall be considered at a pubic hearing... " A Special Review for an ADU or Carriage House may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: 1. The proposed ADU or Carriage House is designed in a manner which promotes the purpose of the ADU and Carriage House program,promotes the purpose of the zone district in which it is proposed, and promotes the unit's general livability. The proposed expansion will most definitely further the purposes of the ADU/Carriage House program as it will be a large, extremely desirable, detached Carriage House most suitable for a caretaker family. There are very few such desirable units. The proposed floor area expansion will increase the livability and utility of the unit and is consistent with the purpose of the zone district. The lower level space makes the unit more suitable for a family. The Lauders have had the current caretakers for over 8 years. Their experience shows that caretakers are much more apt to stay long term if larger, family oriented housing is available to them. 2. The proposed ADU or Carriage House is designed to be compatible with, and subordinate in character to, the primary residence considering all dimensions, site configuration, landscaping,privacy, and historical significance of the property. The proposed floor area does not impact the Carriage House's compatibility with the primary residence. The Carriage House has been built with the same design and materials as the primary residence. It is located off to the side and down a slope from the main residence and compliments the home and the neighborhood. The landscaping is extensive and is consistent through the property . The Carriage House,is private, yet complimentary to the main residence, - and yet still subordinate in character. The addition in no way takes away from the design and compatibility of the unit. 3. The proposed ADU or Carriage House is designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of the neighborhood considering all dimensions, density, designated view planes, operating characteristics, traffic, availability of on-street parking, availability of transit services, and walking proximity to employment and recreational opportunities. Please refer to the pictures in Attachment 3. The Carriage House blends in well with the surrounding uses, is quite compatible with and enhances the character of the neighborhood. The parking area next to the Carriage House will provide more than adequate parking for the unit. Parking and traffic patterns will not be impacted by the addition. -9- Special Review - Section 26.430. The following addressing the Special Review section of the Code as this is the proper procedure for reviewing the requested application. Subsection H, given below, applies to ADUs and states that the Code section for varying the ADU/Carriage House Design Standards are applicable. These have been addressed above. H. Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Standards. Whenever a special review is conducted to determine a change in the design standards required for Accessory Dwelling Units, it shall be considered in accordance with the standards set forth at section 26.520.080(D). SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval to add approximately 120 square feet of floor area to the Lauder Carriage House at 860 Roaring Fork Drive. The proposed expansion will allow the addition of two areawells so existing lower level space can be made habitable and used as two bedrooms. It includes the enclosure of an existing covered stairway to the rear and the addition of an interior landing above the stairs which will add a small nook. These improvements will make this Carriage House much more desirable, livable and appropriate for a caretaker family. Very few impacts will result and the bulk and the mass of the structure will not be significantly impacted. As a non-conforming structure with regard to floor area, the request is made pursuant to Section 26.312 of the Code which allows such an expansion if certain criteria are met. The applicant has addressed these criteria and is in compliance with the criteria. Although very few additional impacts will occur as a result of the proposed 120 square foot expansion, the applicant has agreed to transfer the 120 square feet of floor area from another property, a sending site, and will extinguish that amount of floor areas transferred from that sending property so that it can never be used on that property again. As the standards and review criteria have been met, we request approval for this floor area expansion. The following attachments have been included for you review: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Ordinance 35 of 2004; Attachment 3 - Expansion Floor Area Calculations agreed to and signed by Sarah Oates, City of Aspen Zoning Officer(8.5" x 11" and 11" x 17"); Attachment 4 - Pictures of the Lauder Carriage House and Main Residence; Attachment 5 - Pre-application Conference Summary; -10- Attachment 6 - Proof of Ownership; Attachment 7 - Signed Fee Agreement; Attachment 8 - Authorization to Submit Letter; and Attachment 9 - Adjacent Property Owners for Public Notice. Please call if you have any questions or if we have inadvertently neglected to address any of your concerns. Thank you for your assistance in the preparation of this application and we look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Davis Horn Incorporated obit paciii0 Alice Davis AICP -11- 0*. O hrt �,-. so 11 t 41 t 13 Ln 1 2 '4Ig illt; 111 110 .•07,,,,t;,, ,....:. 1. _:y •svKV►:d a �s :: y • [ 6 ,� � ,� (.1 /i > a a _*• •. veil. u ek 0 1-- V k i Z 6 -1;, 9 _,.Y ✓ Oe 101 � t IR. a Iv +� �. . cc- r.s.,7 z ' s vis .4..„ r SZ• Q• At-ST MI �; �/ 1 %\ �(3 ek .' a�� . Tt E NELL■lasi .1 ,. PQA'k. 'Illt ' 1 - ' e,41.0:` s HoN7_4!=e . 440 5. , 7 Illgt-IIIL...g.ja. 5. I I tilltralt7lit fry 1�. .,( 6 N• �. jlio .. .,ABM 1 riivi to* © � S -b LAKE AV �n ct IA 0 C4? J ^ iZ '' Aida*w O4, - ti116'151 rr ? \Fk \) •l rr�) , . ■ I re 41>‘>. .0 .la r o ��5:1- W ►W, j 1 GR rr 3 m.. oZ �, i9 1611111111144' .! Ct o 2 c 3m � Q• '3/ biG IR 1 W .. 8 s. Y 2 01. i .C.0- / . e CkCX\ i a \.................--7 o 0 9)\--. ,- 44 64 No Q . • , . '2)3.04 Al ....4 Q o , 2. r . 1 . .,e Z 2 •DER, Ea'' 0' o <c.. -i q Lo. (∎I M ATTACHMENT 2. Ordinance No.35 (SERIES OF 2004) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE CODE TO PERMIT ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTIES CONTAINING AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AND WHICH ARE NON-CONFORMING WITH RESPECT TO FLOOR AREA—SECTION 26.312.030.C.3 OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE—NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the applicant to submit an amendment to the Land Use Code, pursuant to sections 26.208; and, WHEREAS, the applicant is Gideon Kaufman, Kaufman Peterson Dishler Attorneys,representing Leonard Lauder, property owner; and, WHEREAS, the requested amendment is to Section 26.312.030.C.3 of the Land Use Code and would permit additional development on properties with an Accessory Dwelling Unit and which are non-conforming with respect to floor area; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Director recommended denial of amendments to the Land Use Code as described herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to consider the proposed amendments, as described herein, on September 7, 2004, and continued October 5, 2004, took and considered public testimony and the recommendation of the Planning Director and recommended, by a three to two (3-2) vote, City Council not adopt the proposed amendments to the Land Use Code, as described herein. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the application according to the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the application meeting or exceeding all applicable standards of the land use code of the City of Aspen Municipal Code and that the approval of the proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS,the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety,and welfare. Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Section 26.312.030.0 of the City of Aspen Land Use shall include a new subsection 3 to read as follows: 3. Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. The only other exception to this requirement shall be for a property with a detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or Carriage House. Such a detached ADU or Carriage House structure may be enlarged or expanded by up to five hundred (500) square feet of floor area, provided that this bonus floor area shall go entirely to the detached ADU or Carriage House and also provided that the ADU or Carriage House does not exceed the maximum size allowed for an ADU or Carriage House. The enlargement or expansion must comply with all other requirements of this Title, and shall receive development review approval as required by 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units, and Special Review approval pursuant to Section 26.430. The 500 square foot floor area expansion may be allowed if the unit complies with the review criteria and standards of the Aspen Land Use Regulations Sections 26.520 including, but not limited to, a finding that the expansion shall be compatible with the character of surrounding uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. The expanded use shall not have adverse impacts on the surrounding uses or those impacts will be mitigated. Only the floor area which will increase the ADU or Carriage House beyond the legally created non-conforming floor area (the expansion floor area) is required to be mitigated. If the impacts of the expanded use cannot be sufficiently mitigated otherwise, an additional method for mitigating those impacts and other impacts considered in the land use review, is to extinguish Historic Transferable Development Rights, pursuant to Chapter 26.535, up to a maximum of 500 square feet. In addition to the ability to extinguish a Historic Transferable Development Right, as /4p, discussed above, an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit it T715 ADU unit that is deed-restricted as a mandatory occupancy unit, may-fly to transfer up to a maximum of 500 square feet from a non-historically designated property that has O f/71--- sufficient available floor area pursuant to the special review procedures detailed in this section. In addition to the special review criteria in Section 26.520.080, floor area from a TDR may be approved pursuant to the following additional review criteria: (1) The additional floor area is a conversion of existing square footage which was not previously counted in floor area. (Example: storage space made habitable.) Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 2 (2) The additional floor area creates a more desirable, livable unit with minimal additional impacts to the bulk and mass of the ADU structure. (3) The additional floor area creates a unit which is more suitable for caretaker families. (4) The increased impacts from the larger size are outweighed by the benefits of having a larger, more desirable ADU. (5) No variance from setbacks can be required to accommodate the bonus floor area approved through this section of the Code. (6) The area and bulk of the ADU structure, after the addition of the bonus floor area, must be compatible with surrounding uses and the surrounding neighborhood. (7) Historic Transferable Development Rights, commensurate with the floor area expansion, are extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.535 — Historic Transferable Development Rights. (8) For the transfer of allowable square footage up to 500 square feet from a non- historically designated property to an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit, the Applicant shall record an instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney removing floor area from the sending property to the Mandatory Occupancy ADU. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, or the Aspen 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 other specific conditions. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect 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 Ordinance 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. Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 3 Section 5: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 22nd day of November, 2004, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 6: This ordinance shall become effective thirty(30)days following final adoption. INTRODUCED,READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2004. Attest: Kathryn S.Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud,Mayor FINALLY,adopted,passed and approved this day of , . Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud,Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester,City Attorney Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 4 P oss A TAB y3 December 6, 2004 Ms. Sarah Oates Via Facsimile City of Aspen Community Development 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 86o Roaring Fork Road ADU for the Lauder Family—Clarification of Added Square footage for Code Amendment—Section 26.312.030 —Non-Conforming Structures—Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004, scheduled for Special Review. Original Permit#0350-2000 Dear Sarah, Per the request of Gideon Kaufman of Kaufman, Peterson & Dishler P.C.,we have prepared the attached F.A.R. calculation to determine the amount of square footage to be requested for Special Review for Code Amendment — Section 26.312.030 — Non-Conforming Structures — Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004. The area requested since the original permit includes the addition of two areawells required by Life Safety Codes to convert Basement space to Bedroom areas, enclosure of the covered porch with the stair to the Basement, and filling in the upper landing area of the stair as headroom allows. We calculate this additional area to be 168 SF over the originally permitted structure per the attached calculation. Please note, that this ADU qualified for a now obsolete F.A.R. bonus in March of 2000, just prior to issuance of the original permit. Per our revised March 16, 2000 F.A.R. calculations, 48 SF of perimeter wall area was allocated to the ADU and 652 SF was added back to the primary residence. The 168 SF less the 48 SF would be 120 SF of additional area to be requested under the code amendment. If you concur with our calculations, please sign and date below for our records. If you have any questions, please call me at 925-4755. Sincerel , Poss Arc itecture and Planning, P.C. Okk By Juli Maple Approved: ',.Projec Manager Enc. V,/0 cc: Gideon Kaufman Sarah Oates, City of Aspen Zoning Of icer , H) DEC p g 2004 YtLii''`,t�E B E [?t<<"nr..04RNENT i -1 m p O .. r•. E - v �a..`etr C c 00 7. O •. O -_. w=' Q C a • i . .x, O :"s a.i�+ as e,_ a) tri Tv �� w c v 0—1 O Q C (6 a) L Q i 0 0 0 �° H CC O CCi •._ NI O //�j//j j 11 .'\ " .'''.4\�__� �'--` `t, jj : CO f Cri CO 0 cc j � _�' w 5 II i. R 4 O o 4 I^� ' S . . .. - o© ,.,,O%/27/27,07//%%/�• •.....��∎•....N: ... ... .....,,_ -N.......L ¢ N 1 0 Q CG W 0 Q .1 0 0 0 O \ \\\ \ \\� N\ \ \ \ \ ce 1. .iNr. \'i \\\ o 0o ';* O,o CL • _. _ NI N N N N 0 cc Q \\ \ \. \\\i\ A \\ \ � ` I\ LL /O/%//im j N LI 7.:, --;lo .:,,y,z; ,i r %/ i/\ \ U Q 3 ! n°j�/// j \ \ ¢ o 3$ 0 to tO to 0 = v) N !L.. g 1 L' �-- I I _ O 0 0 N H O d IIIMENIEMIr * �� !'-‘71-',, '`• . . r � /- Wit' fi r; ' ? ' tiTR•" a A ri.�i .r.' . {t rr '♦`-'R ' ri2 r , . ] t, ,. ^ 1-1%,-., 1 r pt ,j yJ.��II _ F - F . a � ' ii sir .�.. __._.____...-_-. Y 7 c 4 j r — ,4,....,-.4,,,,...,;,.� „r°:sue t i r L f T 7 7.4 4- t. T �1 ! A4 S +1�f A t'f'+'T • /1"/ . * _ ` „_ ..t. :1%�'� "yak K y T 6 , f a �' .� its F1, J ' ‘° + �� . /r _4 _ I{ ;. '' .: i e , it'Pr A� w :m '',1"-.... � of -M ¢ ^�� . r 1 ' r7 : .,,-,..,...- -_-,_,,....,..4. , . ...;:.-.:.--:-,-44.- 0.* ,e,,` • ... „ 'tk,F,r'• . „ . .. . 4*... k . .,•,:. .t.:, ( . , , . . •yofervi&•- ,. .9. . ,. , .• , . .-!....- i • 1,,,4,94.• J*.i, d,,/ • ..s - • _ • . _ .59p. 1 • . • •.•• .-.atm '' • -, . •'‘ 1 . . ..- .•. ... . 1 ' . . , .........„ . ... . .,..,. ..,: • • , , , .... %, % . ie. ..I. .?...+ ',. +:',„'-,,t, , ' .,.:...„,,i -.s" 11.,,,f. • : . +I 1.24, if 4.41. -, .,. `'." . k.- f-,-: -.. Y.' - .. , '': . .•=',-: -%*. . . ! ... ".sil.1 . 't- ... " ..4t• "1.. "...,f,+•,0.)• %NJ,' • '.. ... •- • :•, . ti . 1.,-..3..•• . ; )14 ..... ... , ,. ........ ...e.1._. - r . .:.•-•*-*tit' 44011 -11 -. • . . ' •!!,1°.-',.:- ,_ . I 1 1 ‘ 4 , • , . . ,,,,,•- ' . '.i, i...,-..10,- '-f-- •-, It ' ,,. , . i d ,. ..• t '.)';:.;*1: dr it.o •1. p .i.....,‘, .i;i.,:....•- - .#6,` .' .V• . -4e.. 1,*:.* .1.1.4i--•It:4:';., -••--..."..,,'W."-'—'• . ' *,-,-..?'.'S.C't•i'• 1- ..- -- 41 ■,.st•,,,Y? , =''' '-.4%-..,:4.14,4.--'2:1!'":".• 7 ' -.1-,•1.1.--4 i. . N -..• ,1.4,;..1!.•.; - „.‘li•'f.' ' 4- _,-.-...464.F4,..-_.-tre_,_..,... „4)-+,:is..+•eir:0 41.-`,41:,7..4,,,,,. ,.... '' 4 1"■4_ :".'. 4 Ihik. I , ....1_....„,..„,, 17 , ,, -1,;47r-': L,L14,,3rii4;04- !. 1 ,.,,, .: .. 1 k A. \ . ' ----"-- '.`' - ` , , --. *,;A-.,'- , r'” . ': t'' ' -'7e■ I'' f IA..".0 ,.'l , % *.'.■;''S''. . ',, , - ''_ i ' 1 i.........-,•:•- -- -- --'' 1 1 1r r . ' - — • -. ..'"'„ '' vu--f-,, t.-, ....,+.•., ,.1''' ' .-:1* 1 t =',,,'-te''''''-'7!!'cf. :7--,: . P- ---,--,-,--=.7--;'-':!,'=7; . - i i 4S:•-.3' : 1 ' ' ' ''..'-• ' :p'7. ?.1:,,t--',., ,-'- ' '-,'''' t '• X"..4.5-:,,,---,-.. . ,c... ' ....-,..':"'ll :: ''.`:,; • . ,..:' ,;,,-,-..,', .i,..r-', t - . , .+-,• , ,..', : -• • W' •.ab'''i.'.l,'i iii- e't r. ",'.'''.!,, 7'•.:,. *4-..< ,,'r.,_-% .<..4!'--",• ,r•' -.7%.- ' ,1"...,--„-,:,-1„,!t i t:`',/.'.4-p,Y':1 g k t,' 7,;'"i, . -.'-,,'_')i,-.-'''#-".' -..r,,.,1';;•-',..,-4.,r1.,i.' ....-;,.,,'<._;:',,,_,‘ '.. t..a a .. , •', ..7.; -`•.. •z. -. . . , _ - •t; U :' -,,,t -, .: , - ,t ,r,...,•,,11,1-1ri.A. , . A % 4' ''4 t !...*■'444;4112A 4-„. t.',';'../- :, 7t,::, 4 •' of • ..:;;-..,- , „x.; r• 1 -', ' i •-. • , ;.... , • ., ''',7 ' ' -' v;4.).1•:-G ,*.,-.- ',-,. f, --,..A : .A.,. :!,.A ' 1.,... ;1;I ,1 ..,, -. *".'.`:::. 'N.'-, , , 1 • ..,,, .,, ,,,,:, ,..„,J; . '' .1 ■-. ,,,,g*' - 4-, i-,.. i 4-, 7:,er. A -.of,--, - - /, .. , 4...,. -. ,i''' ■ . ' '.1.. ,.1•I -...' '.,,t•. '..,'. 4:4' :,. ..•■• ,e. * .7'::.5,'-.4i-i....-..-;§1.,e". i' 1 .'' i.....4;-...) . - '. 1 ..i. . . ; rt, ,, • _-, ''. -i.4.4„.,—.:-..\-,,_ ..,-,-,..„,! ., . 1,. e‘ , , ik . •e:t4*-, . ,,„ k ' ..- ' , ', i ' r .■ •.. `"`'`'' ';�''�'� nup://www.pnK1nassessor.orgassessoriparccLasp!/1CCOU. ATTACHMENT (o Pitkin County Assessor/Treasurer Parcel Detail Information Assessor/Treasurer Property Search I Assessor Subset Query I Assessor Sales Search Clerk & Recorder Reception Search Basic Building Characteristics I Tax Information Sales Detail I Value Detail I Residential/Commercial Improvement Detail I Land Detail Tax Account Parcel Number Mill Area Number Levy 001 R018658 273512104013 30.026 Owner Name and Address LAUDER GARY M TRUSTEE 88 MERCEDES LN ATHERTON, CA 94027 Legal Description SUB:SECOND ASPEN COMPANY LOT:6 & LOT:7 Location of 4 12/9/2004 3:18 PI\ Dec 15 04 09: 04a YUSEM / HORN 970 925-5180 p. 3 ,ATTACHMENT 7 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Atreemcnt for Payment of City of Asncn Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN(hereinafter CITY)and LLQ_Urq 6((ry (. er (hereinafter APPLICANT)AGREE'AS FOLLOWS: `f 1• APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for L• i arr e, * •u5' 5 ,ems • �• ' � n ion e7( • (hereinafter,TILE PROJECT). Non .-•- • rm`aj vel` ire 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 etermination of application completeness, APPLICANT shalt pay an initial deposit in the amount of S �.� 1 which is for 6, 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 S205.00 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 gBy: 1 -TA(15V)1 Julie Ann Woods Community Development Director Date: Zt(S'oy Mailing Address: 8S filer eeties' Can Attiei/in. CA 9yeiy g:lsupportlformslagrpayas.doc 1/10/01 • RETAIN rnP Dr" 11�1rr nECORD Dec 15 04 09: 03a YUSEM / HORN 970 925-5180 p. 2 ATTACHMENT_ December 9, 2004 Chris Bendon Aspen Pitkin County Community Director 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Authorization Letter for Lauder Property 890 Roaring Fork Road Dear Chris: This Ietter authorizes Davis Horn Inc. and Kaufman, Peterson & Dishler to submit a land use application on behalf of Laura and Gary Lauder, owners of the property located at 890 Roaring Fork Road in the City of Aspen. This property is the subject of a Special Review land use application pursuant to Ordinance 35, of 2004, Expansion of a Non-conforming Structure. Davis Horn Inc. and Kaufman Peterson and Dishler are also authorized to represent the owners in the land use review process. Davis Horn Inc. is located at 215 South Monarch Street, Suite 104 in Aspen or you can reach them by phone at (970) 925-6587. Kaufman Peterson & Dishler is at 315 East Hyman Avenue in Aspen; 970 925-8166. Please call if you need anything further. Thank you. Sincerely, juku_g,ittief.„ Laura Lauder Gary Lauder Davis Horn- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING January 31, 2004 Chris Bendon, City of Aspen Planning Director Christopher Lee, Planner 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Amendment to the Lauder Land Use Application: Expansion of a Non-conforming - Carriage House Structure Dear Chris: Ordinance 35 of 2004 amends Section 26.312.030 (C)(3) of the land use code to allow the expansion of up to 500 square feet of floor area to a non-conforming ADU or Carriage House structure, if the additional floor area goes entirely into the ADU or Carriage House. The previously submitted December 15, 2004 Lauder land use application addressed review criteria 1 through 6, but did not specifically address items 7 and 8. This letter addresses these two items. The code section is in italics, the applicant's response is not. (7) Historic Transferable Development Rights, commensurate with the floor area expansion, are extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.535 - Historic Transferable Development Rights. This item does not apply to the subject as the Applicant will not be using an historic TDR. (8) For the transfer of allowable square footage up to 500 square feet from a non-historically designated property to an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit, the Applicant shall record an instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney removing floor area from the sending property to the Mandatory Occupancy ADU. The Applicant's attorney, Gideon Kaufman, is creating a deed restriction instrument for review and approval by the City Attorney. This deed restriction will remove/extinguish the requested 120 square feet of floor area from the sending property, Lot 1A Second Aspen Company Subdivision, owned by Bermuda Properties and give the 120 square feet of floor area to the subject property Carriage House. Since the Applicant's ADU/Carriage House-is a Mandatory Occupancy unit, the floor area will be transferred from a non-historically designated property. As shown in Attachment 3 to the original land use application, Sarah Oates, City of Aspen Zoning Offier has signed a letter verifying the calculation that 120 square feet of new area will be required to accomplish the requested improvements. ALICE DAVIS, AICP f GLENN HORN, AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH ST. • SUITE 104 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • 970/925-6587 • FAX: 970/925-5180 te We will submit this deed restriction instrument as soon as it is available. Thank you for your help. Please call if you have any other concerns. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INC. Cut-te LcuAcL, ALICE DAVIS AICP Exle\`‘bA- C,) 1111111111111111111111111 �°�2 ° Page: 1 of 4 01/20/2005 01:401 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 Ordinance No.35 (SERIES OF 2004) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE CODE TO PERMIT ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTIES CONTAINING AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AND WHICH ARE NON-CONFORMING WITH RESPECT TO FLOOR AREA—SECTION 26.312.030.C.3 OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE—NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the applicant to submit an amendment to the Land Use Code,pursuant to sections 26.208; and, WHEREAS, the applicant is Gideon Kaufman, Kaufman Peterson Dishler Attorneys, representing Leonard Lauder,property owner; and, WHEREAS, the requested amendment is to Section 26.312.030.C.3 of the Land Use Code and would permit additional development on properties with an Accessory Dwelling Unit and which are non-conforming with respect to floor area; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewe and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Planning D ector and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action s all be by City Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Director recommended denial of amendments to the Land Use Code as described herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to consider the proposed amendments, as described herein, on September 7, 2004, and continued October 5, 2004, took and considered public testimony and the recommendation of the Planning Director and recommended,by a three to two (3-2) vote, City Council not adopt the proposed amendments to the Land Use Code, as described herein. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the application according to the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director,the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the application meeting or exceeding all applicable standards of the land use code of the City of Aspen Municipal Code and that the approval of the proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan;and, WHEREAS,the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety,and welfare. Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 1 Isos2�o 01/2: 2 05 4 1/202005 01. 401 SILVIR Davis PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Section 26.312.030.0 of the City of Aspen Land Use shall include a new subsection 3 to read as follows: 3. Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. The only other exception to this requirement shall be for a property with a detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or Carriage House. Such a detached ADU or Carriage House structure may be enlarged or expanded by up to five hundred (500) square feet of floor area, provided that this bonus floor area shall go entirely to the detached ADU or Carriage House and also provided that the ADU or Carriage House does not exceed the maximum size allowed for an ADU or Carriage House. The enlargement or expansion must comply with all other requirements of this Title, and shall receive development review approval as required by 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units, and Special Review approval pursuant to Section 26.430. The 500 square foot floor area expansion may be allowed if the unit complies with the review criteria and standards of the Aspen Land Use Regulations Sections 26.520 including, but not limited to, a finding that the expansion shall be compatible with the character of surrounding uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. The expanded use shall not have adverse impacts on the surrounding uses or those impacts will be mitigated.. Only the floor area which will increase the ADU or Carriage House beyond the legally created non-conforming floor area (the expansion floor area)is required to be mitigated. If the impacts of the expanded use cannot be sufficiently mitigated otherwise, ,an additional method for mitigating those impacts and other impacts considered in the land use review, is to extinguish Historic Transferable Development Rights, pursuant to Chapter 26.535, up to a maximum of 500 square feet. In addition to the ability to extinguish a Historic Transferable Development Right, as discussed above, an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit, and only an ADU unit that is deed-restricted as a mandatory occupancy unit, shall have the option to apply to transfer up to a maximum of 500 square feet from a non-historically designated property that has sufficient available floor area pursuant to the special review procedures detailed in this section. In addition to the special review criteria in Section 26.520.080, floor area from a TDR may be approved pursuant to the following additional review criteria: (1) The additional floor area is a conversion of existing square footage which was not previously counted in floor area. (Example: storage space made habitable.) Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 2 11111 1111111111111111111111011111111 Pag :Page: 3 05 4 01/20/2 01/20/2005 81.4 81 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 (2) The additional floor area creates a more desirable, livable unit with minimal additional impacts to the bulk and mass of the ADU structure. (3) The additional floor area creates a unit which is more suitable for caretaker families. (4) The increased impacts from the larger size are outweighed by the benefits of having a larger, more desirable ADU. (5) No variance from setbacks can be required to accommodate the bonus floor area approved through this section of the Code. (6) The area and bulk of the ADU structure, after the addition of the bonus floor area, must be compatible with surrounding uses and the surrounding neighborhood. (7) Historic Transferable Development Rights, commensurate with the floor area expansion, are extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.535 — Historic Transferable Development Rights. (8) For the transfer of allowable square footage up to 500 square feet from a non historically designated property to an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit, the Applicant shall record an instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney removing floor area from the sending property to the Mandatory Occupancy ADU. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, or the Aspen 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 other specific conditions. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect 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 Ordinance 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. Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 3 II II, II 111111111111111N S°�2�° II II P0al/ge20:/2400o5f 01:401 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 Section 5: A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 22" day of November, 2004, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 6: This ordinance shall become effective thirty(30)days following final adoption. INTRODUCED,READ AND ORDERED PUBLISH , . provided by law, l?y.Ihe,City Council of the City of Aspen on the AS day rifr,r,,/ ;: 6. O -- ;;....,:+ .-P,a�ii�.iii J. i . •,j S. 1 h,City Clerk Helen Kalin anderud,Mayor Co,.- ADS FINALLY,adopted,passed and approved this;lday of `Attbft:4 s_ r --1., - `;. ch,City Clerk Helen Kahn Klan erud,Mayor Approved as to form: ohn Worcester,City Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004 Page 4 D DEED RESTRICTION THIS DEED RESTRICTION, made and entered into this day of 2005, by and between BERMUDA PROPERTIES and WILLIAM LAUDER (collectively the "Owner") and THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation (the "City"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Owner is the fee simple owner of that certain real property in the City of Aspen, Colorado, that is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the parties desire that Owner sever 120 square feet of Floor Area from the Property; and WHEREAS, the parties desire that the 120 square feet of Floor Area severed from the Property shall be transferred for the use and benefit of the property described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Benefitted Property"). WHEREAS, the City has confirmed under letter dated December 6, 2004, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and made a part hereof, that 120 square feet of Floor Area is the square footage that the Benefitted Property needs to accomplish its contemplated expansion; and WHEREAS, Owner is prepared to deed restrict the Property to reflect severance from the Property of 120 square feet of Floor Area. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of this deed restriction, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Owner and the City agree as follows: 1. Deed Restriction of Property. Owner hereby permanently severs 120 square feet of Floor Area from the Property. 2. Severance and Transfer of Floor Area. The 120 square feet of Floor Area severed hereunder from the Property is hereby transferred and dedicated to the Benefitted Property. 3. Covenants Running With The Land. The provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants that run with the title to the Property and the Benefitted Property, and shall be deemed an appurtenance to the title to such lands. 4. Attorneys' Fees. Each party shall have the right to enforce this Deed Restriction. In the event of any legal action or proceeding arising out of this Deed Restriction, the prevailing party shall be awarded its reasonably attorneys' fees. 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Deed Restriction as of the day and year first above written. OWNER: BERMUDA PROPERTIES By WILLIAM LAUDER STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing Instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2005, by of BERMUDA PROPERTIES. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: . Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing Instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2005, by WILLIAM LAUDER. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: . Notary Public ACCEPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN By Helen K. Klanderud, Mayor 2 EXHIBIT "A" Lot 1A, SECOND ASPEN COMPANY SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof recorded in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. 3 EXHIBIT "B" Lot 6 and Lot 7, SECOND ASPEN COMPANY SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof recorded in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. 4 puss ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING EXHIBIT "C" December 6,2004 Ms.Sarah City of Aspen Comm b Development 13o S.Galena Street Aspen,Colorado 81611 Re:86o Roaring Fork Road ADU for the Lauder Family-Clarification of Added Square footage for Code Amendment-Section 26.312.030-Non-Conforming#0350-2000 c tires Ordinance No,35, Series of 2004,scheduled for Special Review. Dear Sarah, request of Gideon Kaufman of Kaufman,Peterson&Dishier P.C.,we have prepared the Per the req attached FAA. calculation tendm��determine amount a o30� Non-Conforming 8tirurtures -- Ordi al Review for Code Amendment requested since the original permit includes the Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2oo4- The area addition of two areawells required by Life Safety Codes to convert Basement space to areas, enclosure of the covered porch with the stair to the Basement, and filling upper landing area of the stair as headroom allows.a We elcalculate ho additional area to be 168 SF over the originally permitted structure per calculation. . Please note, that this ADU qualified for a now obsolete F.A.R. bonus in March of 2000,just prior to issuance of the original permit. Per our revised March 16, 2000 FAA_ calculations, 48 SF of perimeter wall area was F less the 48 SF�would bed 652 5F of additional� to to be primary residence. The 168 SF requested under the code amendment If you concur with our calculations,please sign and date below for our records. If you have any questions,please can me at 925-4755. Sincer- , P.C. pot's . ,itecture and Planning, By Juii Maple Approved: -roje a Manager / i z�'�O cc: Sarah Oates, City of Aspen Zoning ter cc: Gideon Kaufman • . . . . . . RECEIVED . DEC 0 a 2004 ASPhN BUILDING DEN RTMENT 605 EAST MAIN MST ASPEN,CO 11611 m 9701925.47S5 (II 97D/9ZC•29SO kkIwW.I3ILLPOSS.COM Eltifi:1105 E X-Sender:juliek @commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:14:05 -0700 To: chrisl @ci.aspen.co.us From: Julie Kieffer <juliek @ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Lauder X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Here is a copy of the letter sent to the Lauders. I also spoke with a representative named Chris at the house. APCHA recommends that Community Development not approve anything until they come into compliance (i.e. rent to unit to a qualified tenant approved by APCHA). Thank you! Lauderl stltr.doc Julie Kieffer Qualifications Specialist 970-920-5216 file://C:\DOCUME-1\chrisl\LOCALS-1\Temp\eudA.htm 3/9/2005 A-9 • Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office 1` 530 E. Main St. Aspen CO 81611 Phone: 970-920-5050 Fax: 970-920-5580 www.aspenhousingoffice.com \ohs' , o� --!,12g Aut March 8, 2005 Laura and Gary Lauder 870 Roaring Fork Rd. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Accessory Dwelling Units Dear Mr. And Mrs. Lauder: This letter is notification that The Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority does not have a current application or lease on the Accessory Dwelling Unit at 866 and 870 Roaring Fork Rd., Aspen. Please have the tenant complete the rental approval packet and return it along with the requested documentation and $25 per unit to our office by March 31, 2005. Enclosed is a copy of the rental approval packet. The application packet is also available online at www.aspenhousingoffice.com or at our office. Leases should be provided to APCHA within 10 days following signing of lease agreements. If you have any questions, please call me at 920-5216. Sincerely, Julie Kieffer Qualifications Specialist Julie Kieffer, 09:23 AM 3/9/2005, Lauder ADU Page 1 of 1 X-Sender:juliek @commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 09:23:41 -0700 To: chrisl @ci.aspen.co.us From: Julie Kieffer<juliek@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Lauder ADU X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean I spoke with Gideon Kaufman, the Lauder's attorney, this morning and he said they did have a family in there, but because children plan on staying in the lower level, they must have the window wells and the family will move in after construction is complete. The housing office still needs to get the family qualified, but after speaking with Mr. Kaufman, we don't feel we need to withhold the approval for the construction. Julie Kieffer Qualifications Specialist 970-920-5216 Printed for Christopher Lee <chrisl @ci.aspen.co.us> 3/9/2005 ExvtitA, F ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION-Minutes — October 05, 2004 Ruth Kruger opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission in Sister Cities Meeting Room. Commissioners Brandon Marion, Ruth Kruger, Jack Johnson, John Rowland and Steve Skadron were present. Staff in attendance: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Chris Bendon, Chris Lee, James Lindt, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Ruth Kruger hoped this meeting would adjourn by 6:45 p.m. Kruger inquired about the new windows in the Elli's building and asked if they were historic or went through a historic review process. James Lindt will follow up on Elli's. MINUTES MOTION: Jack Johnson moved to approve the minutes from July 27, August 03rd, 11th and 17`h, September 7th and 2112004;2004; seconded by Steve Skadron. Rowland, Johnson and Skadron approved the minutes, Motion Carried. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None stated. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (09/21/04): CODE AMENDMENT-TDR'S Ruth Kruger opened the continued public hearing on the Code Amendment; Chris Bendon noted this was a continued hearing from 9/21St. There were 5 members present for this hearing. Gideon Kaufman addressed the 2 items that concerned P&Z and placed suitable review by Planning & Zoning and staff. Kaufman raised questions regarding staff's interpretation that the only way to accomplish this was through the Historic TDR Program. Chris Bendon stated there was concern that this would take away from the Historic TDR Program, which has not yet been proven. Kaufman said this code amendment was for this particular unit because of code changes, which has made this a non-conforming unit so they cannot add 2 window wells to make the downstairs legally 2 bedrooms. Kaufman said their TDR code amendment was only used for employee housing; their TDR program enhances only affordable housing and doesn't have the same mark-up as the Historic TDR Program so they are not taking from that existing Historic TDR Program but they are creating a market from the surplus of free-market housing and converting it for the community. Kaufman said that each special review would go through P&Z for approval for each particular situation, which accomplishes a valuable community goal. Kaufman provided the criteria for P&Z to follow. 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION-Minutes — October 05, 2004 Ruth Kruger asked where the TDR was coming from. Kaufman replied that it was from a free-market house that did not want to use all of the FAR allowed. Kruger reiterated that Kaufman was creating a new program (code amendment) that would create sending sites that were not historic and opening the market for a larger opportunity taking FAR from a free-market house to an ADU. Bendon re- stated concern for the demand and the Historic Program could leverage the TDRs. Jack Johnson asked if the code had never been changed would there have been sufficient FAR on this property to amend this ADU. Bendon answered no. Johnson asked if the transferred floor area must accommodate the extent of the non-conformity plus the expansion or if only just the floor area has been resolved. Bendon replied that Joyce covered the first meeting on this and P&Z addressed that question by saying that you should only cover the amount that is necessary to accommodate the actual expansion and should have to first cover the overage. Johnson asked the overage. Bendon answered it was 750 square feet. Johnson stated that was only created because the bonuses were taken away, correct. Bendon explained that between 1999 and 2002 where there were 2 bonuses for ADUs; one for detached ADUs that provided 50% bonus and the other was for mandatory occupancy. Bendon said there were 3 mandatory occupancy ADUs created and this was the only one occupied. Bendon said in 2002 the bonuses were taken away and the only way to ensure the 100% bonus was if the ADU was sold through the housing lottery system. Johnson asked by simply selling this ADU to the family that was living there was insufficient without a TDR. Bendon replied that was correct. Public Comments: Lynn and daughter, who live in this ADU, were present. Kaufman stated that when this unit was legally built it was mandatory rental. Kaufman stated that this code change would allow this ADU to expand and continue to house this family. Bob Staradoj, public, asked if there had ever been a case where an ADU on site has been sold. Bendon replied no; the community was looking for the first one to be sold. Bendon added if the ADU were sold the property owner would gain a 100% of the FAR, which was exempt and the property owner gains an additional 50% FAR bonus. David Hoefer reiterated that the commission was not dealing with a specific case for this code amendment. Bert Myrin, public, stated that the code that Jack and Chris spoke about gave an incentive to the employee side and what was presented tonight was from the employee side not the owner side. Myrin reiterated what Chris stated for the bonuses. 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION-Minutes — October 05, 2004 John Rowland stated that he was in favor of this code change and the only negative aspect was administrative for staff; he said that staff could handle the challenge. Steve Skadron shared John's thoughts considering the restrictions placed on the economics on the property and there was a viable argument for this but Skadron also shared Jack's concern of getting this done under the current code rather than actually changing the code. Jack Johnson stated 3 issues: there were ways that this could be done for this family under the existing code; this code change was in the best interest for this applicant but not for the city and voiced concerned about the TDR sending and receiving sites. Brandon Marion mirrored Jack's no vote because of the far- reaching effect on the entire city. Ruth Kruger asked how long the historic TDR program has been in existence and the number of applications to date. Bendon replied it has been in place for about 7 months and there was one application pending. Kruger said that the vote on this code change wouldn't diminish a program that wasn't being utilized. Kruger did not see a problem with this application and P&Z would look at each application for these types of situations. MOTION: Brandon Marion moved to approve Resolution #30, 2004 recommending approval of a code amendment to permit expansion of non- conforming structures; seconded by Steve Skadron. Roll call vote: Rowland, yes; Skadron, no; Johnson, no; Marion, no; Kruger, yes. DENIED 3-2. Bendon asked the commission if there was a particular element of this code amendment that if it were different then you would support it. Marion replied he liked the concept of giving FAR to affordable housing but wanted a more comprehensive plan than the one presented. Johnson said it would have to be a last resort otherwise more big houses were being created and Johnson wanted the Historic TDR Program to prove itself prior to creating another TDR program. Chris Bendon introduced Chris Lee the new planner. PUBLIC HEARING: LOT 1, ODEN LOT SPLIT STREAM MARGIN REVIEW Ruth Kruger opened the public hearing for the Stream Margin Review for Lot of the Oden Lot Split. David Hoefer said that the notice was received and the requirements have been met; the commission had jurisdiction to proceed. James Lindt stated that the Stream Margin Review was to determine the top of slope; Lot 4 t .16 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 22, 2004 Council agreed to continue the list of design options to December 14th ORDINANCE #35, SERIES OF 2004 — Code Amendment Non- Conforming Structures James Lindt, community development department, told Council this code amendment proposes a new TDR system to allow for transfer of allowable FAR in 500 square foot increments from properties that have excess FAR available to properties that have exceeded their allowable FAR but the TDRs would only be allowed for the expansion of ADUs or carriage houses. Lindt told Council staff does not support this code amendment. Staff feels this will take away from the demand side of the historic TDR system recently adopted by Council. Lindt noted this could be accomplished through the historic TDR system with some language changes, which language is presented in the staff memorandum. Council's options are to approve the ordinance as written with the creation of non-historic TDRs, or approve staff's recommended language using historic TDRs, or deny the code amendment. P&Z recommended denial of this code amendment. Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, told Council this code amendment would allow for a positive result for employee housing. Kaufman told Council this is about a caretaker unit approved and built. After the caretaker unit was built, there was a code amendment, which made the caretaker unit non-conforming as to FAR and eliminated any flexibility. The caretakers of this particular unit are a couple with two children. Kaufman showed pictures of the freestanding caretaker unit. Kaufman told Council in order to accommodate two bedrooms in the lower level, window wells are required. Installation of window wells changes the FAR. Kaufman said the TDR in this code amendment can only be used in an ADU; it cannot be used to expand a free market house. The staff's recommendation will not work as the existing historic TDR program is not allowed to expand ADUs. Historic TDRs are to be used to increase the size of free market units so the cost of historic TDRs will be higher. The proposed code amendment will help affordable housing in Aspen at no cost to the city. Kaufman told Council there were people here to testify in favor of this code amendment who had to leave before this public hearing. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. 14 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 22, 2004 Dwayne Romero urged Council to support this TDR program. Romero said the sales price for historic TDRs would overwhelm this type of program; the historic TDRs are not economically viable for increasing the size of ADUs. Toni Kronberg said this is a creative way to keep families in town. Lynn, asked for the opportunity to make Aspen their home. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilman Semrau asked about selling the ADU to the occupants. Kaufman said then the owner of the property would lose control of their caretaker unit. Kaufman told Council this code amendment will apply to mandatory occupancy ADUs only. Mayor Klanderud said the free market house with the ADU got the full benefit of the code in place at the time. Mayor Klanderud said she feels the historic TDR would solve the problem. Kaufman said it is an economic issue. Mayor Klanderud stated she supports the goal the applicant is trying to achieve. Kaufman reiterated this TDR program is only going to ADUs, not free market houses. Councilwoman Richards the goal of making the basement livable and keeping a family in town is laudable. This is one of the only mandatory ADUs where the owner has not tried to get rid of that condition. Councilwoman Richards said she feels the free market house sizes in Aspen are too large and she would favor ways to use up FAR for free market structures. Councilwoman Richards said she has no problem with this code amendment as long as it is to the benefit of families staying in town. Lindt noted if this is mandatory occupancy only, it would apply to 2 units in the city. Councilman Torre asked if there will be value added to this property by converting a two bedroom ADU to a three bedroom house. Kaufman said this mandatory ADU is right next to the main house and the benefit is having employees close and allowing that family to grow. This would allow community housing. Councilman Torre said the owners of the property will see an increase in the value of their structures. Mayor Klanderud said she supports the goal in this code amendment; however, she is concerned that this is an exception for 2 or 3 properties. Also this code amendment could have broad implications unknown at this time. Mayor Klanderud stated she could support staff's recommendation incorporating the historic TDRs. This would dilute the benefit of historic properties. 15 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 22, 2004 Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #35, Series of 2004, amending it allow mandatory occupancy only ADUs to take advantage of either a historic TDR or a transfer of FAR from a free market lot; seconded by Councilman Paulson. Councilwoman Richards said this is a very limited in scope and a subset type of growth in the city's code. This may make more ADUs used and livable in the future. Councilwoman Richards noted the city eliminated mandatory occupancy of ADUs in the code because no one was building these units. Developers preferred payment-in-lieu. Councilwoman Richards stated it is worth rewarding someone who is not asking to get out from their mandatory occupancy ADU. Councilwoman Richards amended her motion to include to the maximum allowable FAR for an ADU or a maximum of 500 fee for a TDR; seconded by Councilman Paulson. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Torre, yes; Paulson, yes; Richards, yes; Semrau, no; Mayor Klanderud, no. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #36, SERIES OF 2004 — Chart House GMQS Allocation James Lindt, community development department, told Council this ordinance grants a growth management allocation to the Chart House for 11 tourist accommodations. The applicants originally took the project to P&Z for growth management scoring before conceptual PUD. P&Z did not give it a passing score because it did not have conceptual PUD approval. After that review, P&Z rescored the application and granted a passing score. Council may accept the score, amend the score or remand it back to P&Z. Lindt noted P&Z acted appropriately and scored this under the land use code. Staff reports there are enough tourist accommodation available. Staff recommends allocating 11 growth management quota contingent upon receiving final PUD approval. Stan Clauson, representing the applicant, reminded Council they granted conceptual approval October 23rd. When P&Z reviewed this, they gave above threshold scores in all categories. Clauson stated this project will go back to P&Z and to Council for final review. 16 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 8'60 k) k 1v( c spelt,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 3 Wo$ ,200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) �� I, U Cpl L,t4j.Q C ( vtc4 L' (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 of notice: 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 not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(1,_,) 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 class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal governm:nt, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns 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 of 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 of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. gnature The forreygoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me th•s ) day of �4�- , 2005, by-�c�-,_ , L.- • WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: V_,..------,,,_ PUBLIC NOI tut. % (�1. HE: SPECIAL REVIEW t)R EXPANSION OF A %r. :• • NON-CONFORMING FORMING CARRIIAGE HOUSE AT 860 Notary Public / 0�? ROARING FORK ROAD / z' sc,,s- J : a i NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public I/ 0P'' nearing will be held on Tu isday,March IS,2005, '• i Cr at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m.before the As- 4 O 1 � pen Planning and Zoning Commission,Sister Cit- 0 i lr�,''•. •'O� ies Room,City Hall, 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to %t 'Q?•..,. , .. consider an application submitted by Davis Horn IN ' 4 ,'' • Inc.,on behalf of Laura and Gary Lauder,request- 3. , . . ing approval of a Special Review to accommodate an addition to the mandatory occupancy Carriage ATTACHMENTS . House located on their property that already ex- : ceeds the allowable FAR allotted to the site pur- suant to the underlying zoning. • For further information,contact Chris Lee COPY OF THE PUBLICATION at the City of Aspen Community Development De- partment, 130 Sii Galena St., Aspen, CO 970.429.2759, ( r by email at chrisl9.2759,en.co.( ). JRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) s/Jasmin Tygre,Chair Aspen PI ning and Zoning Commission • 10 5.(2438]The Aspen Times on February 27, 3 AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED -. BY MAIL ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 31e0 Roar i1j Fz2 rk 1?tX3 JI ,Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: m c.(' .I 1,5) ,200 S STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) .4 j d . D a V I S (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 of notice: 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 not 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 z 'day of F. bructry , 200 5, 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 class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns 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 of 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 of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. CaUL o/L4J Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 7.47 day of . , 200` by (1- L / WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 'ygUC.::. My commission expires: /' F O; 4<,� ;© Notary Public t,..,fi :C,s ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL PUI3LIC NOTICE RI':: SPECIAL REVIEW FOR EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING CARRIAGE DOUSE AT 860 ROARING FORK ROAD NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 15, 2005, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room. City I fall. I 30 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Davis I lore Inc.. on behalf of Laura and Gary Lauder, requesting approval of a Special Review to accommodate an addition to the mandatory occupancy Carriage House located on their property that already exceeds the allowable FAR allotted to the site pursuant to the underlying zoning. For further information, contact Chris Lee at the City of Aspen Community Development Department. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 970.429.2759, (or by email at chrisl@ci.aspen.co.us). s/Jasmine Tvgre, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on February 27, 2005 City of Aspen Account 120 square feet are proposed for the addition to the Lauder Carriage House including the conversion of existing basement storage space to usable space. • - PUBLIC NOTKA' - t " DATE,.,,, o . t, - TIME --- . - PLAGE "Nil ' PURPOSE _— \ -- - f allidil13211111.1111-- - , • •N/I IIW r' 411111V , °e%UWW V W yrwar I i 5{" Us�Awry�TEMPLATE 5160• �'• -,k 140Q400'AVIRY ,r%-, r �" `',, BERMUDA PROPERTIES INC CRANDALL JACKS&GESINE A FARISH ANNE F ESTEE LADDER CO ATTN JOAN 'r 2200 WILLOWICK#16E I " KRUPSKAS PO BOX 1088 x,� 767 FIFTH AVE 40TH FL ASPEN,CO 81612 HOUSTON,TX 77027 NEW YORK,NY 10153 FISHCAMP LLC GRINDLAY ELIZABETH E LLLP 86.92% HJE INC C/0 CASA DE AMIGO OFFICE GOLDSTEIN EDWARD ARTHUR TRUST INT 1751 W CITRACADO PKWY 416 COMSTOCK AVE C/O DAN KERST PC ESCONDIDO,CA 92029 LOS ANGELES,CA 90024 302 8TH ST#310 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 HAWKINS H L III JOSEPHSON MARVIN KERN ALBERT 300 BOARD OF TRADE STE 200 33 E 70TH ST PO BOX 389 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70005 NEW YORK, NY 10021 ASPEN,CO 81612 KOCH CHARLES G TRUSTEE KOCH DAVID H TRUSTEE MAY 15 PARTNERS LP C1O KOCH FAMILY MGMT KOCH INDUSTRIES C/O 109 N POST OAK LN#432 4111E 37TH STN PO BOX 2256 HOUSTON,TX 77024-7755 WICHITA, KS 67220 WICHITA,KS 67201 MERRIAM GAIL A&JAMES A MOORE LORNA G 4.106% PITKIN COUNTY 1884 MTN VIEW DR 171 FRANKLIN 530 E MAIN ST STE 302 TIBURON, CA 94920 DENVER,CO 80218 ASPEN,CO 81611 r:61-t` Pro �er� Du)�ers- �'IIn P • ATTACHMENT ei _nn1 c m 1 1t=AW a Aa3AV-09-008-1 = . 60915 31V1dIN31®tiaA 'asf ---l--_—_-- - RU171111199 LI IIIPr ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: + Lau /£�,, Qrt -- u ra cw r Location: ketarl r l� Pa (Indicate street address, lot&block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID#(REQUIRED) '7 5- I - C 7 .- REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Oc V i 5 -{orb :i 10(1 ( (0 Q Address: PA S 5. 1 I lohQrcK 5. a 10(1 �`I /w 81( I 1 Phone#: end 7J3 . • (pS S7 PROJECT: ECLU E 11510 n A)ini "'I l-(orm/r' c/" ' "CN'1 Name: Gary �.Y �.l'G4or' Address: $ 1► �OrLe ' Phone#: �sI 1 C (11-62-7 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ❑ Conditional Use n Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. IXSpecial Review ❑ Final PUD(& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Devt. ❑ GMQS Allotment (1 Final SPA(& SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition ❑ GMQS Exemption (-I Subdivision ❑ Historic Designation ❑ ESA—8040 Greenline, Stream n Subdivision Exemption(includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin,Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use ❑ Other: ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment r210. 312431). 63 EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses,previous approvals,etc.) ?r■gly_ -Farm l9 lei' D -azkci Cyr' Car ri' 1-Lo u (iooM w/Thandiet/ btL PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings,uses, modifications,etc.) i=x Petal)t/ Carr`ta o (gr (arc . ` 3 (5%e&I-1on al0.312.63-0. (- 3 ) Have you attached the following? ar S FEES DUE: $ 13 1 n ❑ Pre-Application Conference Summary Ste -,ter p_4?p. [� ttachment#1, Signed Fee Agreement 1'� Fesponse to Attachment#3, Dimensional Requirements Form _,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. RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Chris Lee, 970.429.2759 DATE: 12/14/04 PROJECT: 860 Roaring Fork Road ADU Expansion REPRESENTATIVE: Alice Davis OWNER: Gary M. Lauder Revocable Trust TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 Step P&Z Application DESCRIPTION: The Applicant is seeking an amendment that would allow it additional development opportunities for an existing Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) by inserting window wells into the sub-grade portion, although there is no remaining FAR on the property. This situation exists because the property is non-conforming due to changes in the code regarding the percentage of FAR taken by ADU units after it was constructed. Consequently, this project hinges on whether City Council approves Ordinance 35 (series of 2004) that will be reconsidered on January 10, 2005. Land Use Code Sections 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.312 Nonconformities 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.520 Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses 26.710.050 Zone District R-15 Review by: Community Development Staff and approved by P&Z Public Hearing: Before the P&Z Referral Agencies: Zoning, Building Planning Fees: Planning Deposit - Minor ($1310 for six hours) Ref. Agency Fees: N/A Total Deposit: $1310 (additional planning hours over deposit amount are billed at a rate of $220/hour) To apply, submit the following information: 1. Proof of ownership. 2. Signed fee agreement along with fee. 3. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 4. Completed Land Use Application form. 5. Certified plat of the property along with architectural drawings of the proposed changes. 6. 15 Copies of entire application package. Notes: 1. This application is contingent upon the passage of Ordinance 35 (series of 2004) that City Council will reconsider on January 10, 2005. If the ordinance passes that evening the application can be submitted one month after on February 10, 2005. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. CITY OF ASPEN nrnunity Development Chris Lee 130 S. Galena 7 7 :=1" -... Aspen CO 81611 1,9 MEM S U. .POSTAGE **PI'Sm 141:17 ArSCSR. ...t) UlAf4131....E 8192744 MAY 15 PARTNERS LP 109 N POST OAK LN#432 HOUSTON, TX 77024-7755 MAY1109 //024'2038 1N 08 0.5/05/o5 RETURN 10 SENDER NO FORWARD ORDER ON FILE UN/\3..C: TU FORWARD RETURN TO SENDER A 1 6 i 411k (-, - u.S ACt ItZ ):` p37 THE CITY OF ASPEN 130 SoLIR GALENA STREET ASPEN,COLORADO 81611-1975 PAUL JOHN WILLIAM 400 RUE ST ANN APT 107 METAIRIE, LA70005 WILL400 700050085 1003 28 03/05/05 RETURN TO SENDER WILLIAMS MOVED LEFT NO ADDRESS UNABLE TO FORWARD RETURN TO SENDER Plfli ! HI :; .4 • I;: i r' . . \ - F13 . It 1 ." /41.-.1 )1 r) 7 -:- THE CITY OF ASPEN 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN,COLORADO 81611-1975 ■ NJ y c),„ Carr.Init. MAROON C CLUB N1ASTER CIATION 0 Not Delmerable As Addressed Uned.e To Forward CL insulfIctent Address ,, SP 081611 El Moved,Left No Address 1.: ,tclairn te d Refused or?RteK, Known No Such Street D Number Vec.erit El Illegible 0 No Mail Receptacle ti Box Closed-No Order ' liprieu For Better Addree6 t:1 :E.i