Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.drac.overlay.19941213A G E N D A OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT SUBCOMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING December 13, 1994, Tuesday 4:00 P.M. 2nd Floor Meeting Room City Hall I. COMMENTS Committee Members Planning Staff Public II. NEW BUSINESS A. 904 E. Cooper, Leslie Lamont & Amy Amidon III. ADJOURN i MEMORANDOM TO: Overlay Zone District Sub-Committee FROM: Leslie Lamont, Deputy Director Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 904 East Cooper Street FAR Overlay Review DATE: December 13, 1994 SIIDIIdARY: This review is based on the General Guidelines found in the recently adopted Neighborhood Character Guidelines and the specific guidelines for the East Aspen Neighborhood. Special Review and compliance with the review is mandatory because the parcel is 6004 square feet. Planning staff believes that this project substantially complies with the General Guidelines and the guidelines for East Aspen. APPLICANTS: Shawn Helda represented by Stuart Lusk LOCATION: 904 East Cooper, Lots K&L, Block 117 Townsite of Aspen and Lot L, Block 35 East Aspen Addition Townsite of Aspen ZONING: R/MF (Residential Multi-Family) STAFF COMMENTS: Please refer to the application for a complete representation of the proposal. Another proposal for this site was reviewed by the sub-committee in October. The committee denied approval finding the proposed duplex was not consistent with the guidelines and did not consider the adjacent historic resource in the design of the new structure. The current application is a new proposal. The proposed development is a duplex structure located on the corner of East Cooper Avenue and West End Street. General Guidelines: The General Guidelines are meant to be broad in nature and address design variables that are common to all areas. Mass and Scale - 1. Buildings should help establish a sense of human scale that is inviting to pedestrians. 1 response: This design incorporates many elements that are of human scale. The building is divided into two primary forms each representing a separate dwelling unit. Taking advantage of the corner lot, the front. door of each dwelling unit is accessed off of the public rights-of-way (ROW). The rear half of the duplex steps down to West End Street and alley from the middle roof which is 28' to the ridge. The front porch of the rear unit is 13' in height. The front unit on Cooper Avenue is 25' to the ridge and the front porch is also approximately 13' in height. 2. New`buildings should appear similar in scale to those in the established neighborhood, or to the scalq that is desired for the neighborhood. response: The structures along East Cooper vary in character and density. Although the new structure is proposed to be only 20' below the allowable FAR (3580 vs. 3600) the massing of the duplex is divided into many elements that gives the structure the appearance of two detached units. To the east of this parcel is a small victorian cottage that is on the Historic Inventory. The parcel has recently undergone a lot split with the caveat that any redevelopment of either new parcel will require relocation of the historic structure to either parcel. The proposed development at 904 East Cooper is 9' off of the east property boundary. Although the east elevation of the duplex is one long wall, the applicant has attempted to break up the scale """ of the building with corner balconies on Cooper Avenue and the alley and two recessed portions in the middle of the structure. The second floor recess is 1'6" and the first floor recess is 3'6". 3. The street elevation of a building should be designed to appear in scale with those seen traditionally. response: Most renovations of historic homes on East Cooper have preserved the small cottage at the front of the parcel. The design of this structure steps the mass of the duplex away from both streets similar in fashion to the renovated homes. 4. Building entrances should be similar in scale to those seen traditionally. response: The front doors are pedestrian in scale. They are single wide doors with a porch overhang that is only 13 feet in height. Buildina Form - 5. All buildings should use roof and building forms that establish a sense of visual continuity for the community, by repeating typical form. 2 response: The two pitched roofs are consistent with the other roof styles in the neighborhood. The porches on the corner of the two seperate units and the barrel roof connecting the two distinct building forms add variety to the building form. Site Design - 6. Orient the primary entrance of a building toward the street. response: Both front doors are oriented to the two streets that the structure is adjacent to. 7. Place the building entry at an elevation that is similar to those seen traditionally in the neighborhood. response: According to the. submitted plans, the front door on Cooper Avenue is two steps up from the sidewalk and the front door on West End is one step up from the sidewalk. 8. Where feasible, locate structures such that they maintain solar access to adjacent properties. response: N/A East Asoen Guidelines Mass and Scale 17. New buildings should be sensitive in scale to existing, smaller buildings in the neighborhood. response: As mentioned in this memo, the design attempts to reduce the scale using a variety of design elements. The front facade of both dwelling units range from 23' to 30' in width. The Guidelines recommend no greater than 30 feet in width for single family homes. The duplex structure is divided into two distinct masses with the barrel roof connecting the two elements. The barrel roof if 22' in height while the height to the ridge of the front and rear units are 25' and 28' respectively. A small victorian cottage is located to the east of the proposed development. The new structure is 9' off of the property boundary. Several indentations help break up the wall plane, however, staff recommends that the applicant restudy the east elevation to recess the indentations further providing more of a definition on the wall facing the historic cottage. There are two very large windows on the west elevation of both units and one very large window on the south elevation of the rear unit. These windows are not consistent with the guidelines that state "to help establish a sense of scale, use windows and doors 3 that are similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally." The windows range from 11' to 13' tall and are approximately 5' wide. Staff recommends a reduction in the size of the windows bringing the building more in scale with traditional scale of the neighborhood. Building Form Please see discussion with regard to building form above in the General Guidelines section. The Guidelines are the same. Site Plan 19. Provide a front yard in all development. response: The proposal includes a large front yard that encompasses the entire corner at the intersection of Cooper and West End. Although the property owner could construct a fence, the fence cannot block public view of the required 35~ open space for a parcel in the RMF zone district. In addition, the edge of pavement for both public right-of-ways is between 25' and 15' away from the property line providing the illusion of a greater front yard. Although most property owners maintain some of the ROW in a landscaped condition, and these owners may do so, permanent fixtures are not permitted as the streets may be widened at some date in the future. 20. Buffer edges of the site from adjacent properties with fences or hedges. response: The landscape plan does not indicate any fences. The landscaping does include some hedges dotted around the property. A parking space is located on the northeast corner of the property. This space should be of a "grass-Crete" finish to buffer the paved surfaces from the adjacent property. 21. Locate the primary floor at or near sidewalk grade. response: The plans indicate one "sunken patio" area that is in the middle of the property and in the center of the two distinct structural elements. Entrances to the two garages, off the alley, are at grade. The entrance to the accessory dwelling unit on the east side of the property is below grade. Although this review is not supposed to consider building materials, the rock work on the lower portion of the building creates a perception of added height to the first floor pulling the building above the sidewalk grade which is not consistent with this guideline. 4a.,_ 4 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the duplex development at 904 East Cooper Avenue with the following conditions of approval: 1. All material and design representations in the submitted packet and made at the meeting by the applicant or applicant's representative shall be adhered to by the applicant or the approval is void. 2. The recessed spaces along the east elevation shall be restudied to create greater depth and further break up the scale on the east elevation. 3. Parking space number 5 shall be a "grass-Crete" finish to reduce the amount of paved surfaces at the rear of the parcel. 4. The applicant shall restudy the size of the two large windows on the west elevation of both units and the large window on the south elevation of the rear units to reduce their large scaled appearance. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Special Overlay Review for 904 East Cooper Avenue with the conditions outlined in staff's memo dated December 13, 1994." ATTACHMENTS: A. Application B. Submitted Plans v.'-_' S STATEMENT OF EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 904 E. COOPER STREET Submitted to: Ordinance 35 Architectural Committee December 1, 1994 In surveying the east and commercial neighborhood, we find a wide diversity of azchitectural styles ranging from small miner's cottages and Victorian cottages to the large, recently developed projects such as The Enclave Condominiums located adjacent to this property. This project represents a monumental fuming point in azchitectural direction for that azea Up until this point, the size and scale of the Victorian cottages were built, in most cases, with the driving forces being owner economics and personal usage needs exclusively. As we followed through, looking at the townhome developments and condominium developments in the neighborhood, we still found this was the primary motivating force for the development of the projects. Our project, on the other hand, is not driven entirely by interior space usage by the owner. We have attempted to meet the interior needs and desires of the owner as well as providing a sensitive, pedestrian-friendly design for the exterior of the building. The design bridges the past with the future by incorporating local/regional azchitectural references. We aze proud of our creative effort. The Building Desien The building has been created to help establish a sense of human scale which is inviting to pedestrians. The building is broken up into two main components with smaller components flowing between the two. As this is a very prominent comer lot on the entrance to Aspen, we felt that the appeazance from the southwest comer would be the most important point from which to focus our attention. From this angle, the building appears to be broken into two main modules with a courtyard which serves to break up the structure and lets open space flow into the core of the property. We have put the main massing away from this comer and gradually stepped the building down with multiple gables from north (alley) to south, arriving at the Cooper Street elevation. Elevations flowing from the alley step down from a 28-foot ridge to a 23-foot high cylinderical roof connecting part of the house to the part of the building closest to Cooper Street which highest ridge is only 25 feet (17 feet mid-point). Similarly, the roof lines inflect downwazd to the West End side of the street and the Cooper side of the street as well as to the east towards the historical structure. The F.A.R in the reaz building is 2400, and the F.A.R in the front unit is approximately 1,200 square feet. The owner has sacrificed one gazage space to produce a more pedestrian- friendly alley. By sacrificing one gazage space, we aze able to provide a break to the western side of the building along with adding to the open space. Open space is 58% where caning requires only 35% Other Site and Elevation Features 1. Egress wells are located in the core of the property preventing the need for deep access wells along the historic side; 2. Large yard maintained at comer of Cooper and West End; 3. Small scale windows; similar in size and shape; 4. Strategically placed landscaping of 8 to 10 spruce and 10 - 12 aspen trees; and 5. Garage detailing to minimize visual impact; We have done what we feel is the maximum amount of design compromise to accommodate the neighborhood chazacteristic guidelines while still maintaining the minimum acceptable interior living experience. We hope the Review Committee feels the same. ~i~ `w i ALLEY 20.20 N 75°09'11"W E U 60. U4' ~~ '(O 5 SNP 2e.2 ~ '• 1 __ , __ • ~~ A n I \ 'yp n b ~ ~~ ~ m, .•, `~ s.o ' ', _ ., r) ~, ~ • -_i n . ' ___1. ------1 ~ - o.s , 34.4 II uP5 ~~~G • . , t~' , I STORY HUUSE I o.~ I 2.0 N II.9 I I .5 ~ I o 2.3 o I ~ O v 13.0 ~ PLANTER N 23.3 -- . _.. - -I---- W - :~.- . . , .. ~ I c 0 I ~~I~ Z 0 o_ I ~ I M 3 °' L o K "PARCEL A" v ~ I I -a -- - 9p 8 •O' 00 . 4 ' '_ ~', 5 75°09 11 "E 270.00 ~ _.,~; ; ~• •- BASIS OF BEARINGS 270.19 FIELD EAST COOPER AVENUE 73.70' Av g ~ ~p~ND ~ oN 0 G Ttlp` pLL c _TtFIES T13A~ S• i LA ~ •,~i 1'~ ~/ '-~! / j~ v NORT /4DU L` O T 1 N -i m z v /ALLEY -- (~O . o ~} -C o T L~rl~ ~~,~ iJ ', ~ ~- ~ -~ ~ X •~~~ ° y NUJ ~ ~vGG ~ ~~~~ 2 r M rn Q 0 7- 3--~ I J .~ ti' ~ ~ J ~"' 1_ r I 1 r_ 00 _~° L m i i r ~ 1^ t ~ ~ V ~l _ Q ~~ I ~W V '0 v .. .~ n EctRess m ~ - .~, ~ f~ 1 ~ " .. ~~3 !' ~ , ~ ~1 ~- .~~ ~~ ~T ~~~ ~~ r I ~ ~~v ~` ,'~~ ~~ ~`1 ~n -226 ~ . , JJ C~NT7~ ., .~,,I. EGZE_Sg ../ 7 v' J/ L I 6 d~ F a r ~ I i ~/~~ sr3~'~. ~~ ~ -C'_ ~~ Z ~c ~I .~ c~ rn ~ ~ ~ v~ ~ ~1 ~~ \'~ J rl ~~ O~ ~ ~~ ~ 0 ~5 i ~' E 'ant r• i K, ,' ~.. .. ~ .. , . ED(rC of PAVEYIAENT~ 117LTE IziLYOND 1y N o i .1.~ n '~ , a i s ~ M ~Z 'li S ~~ r, o i id~3,3 Hln o s r--~ ~ ~ .._ ,` ,, -~- ~, o~ ~- ~. 95~ 4NO~~~ ~17Q~~' ~i ., i ~~c ~ r ~ ,,,,10 1 -~~ ("'~ 75 .~ ___ - -_~ r-~ i ~~ I I ~ E AST ELEVATION ..~.~. 5~ ~~I ~//~/ ~- - IFi-II I~--•-{U gZ- SiD1N~r IWW-I, C ..--p lii~ ~ ~% ~~~~ ~~ N O R T H E L E V /~ T I O N ...~~ 51/T. .5 ~ _ __ IrZ COI e tl~-~' I a- ~ -- - --- -- ® ~ ~ .- -v SloiNc~ ~ -~ O~ _ ~- . . ~ ~~ ~~. ~= _ ~ =~ , ~ ~- ~- ~~~ z~~ z9 1$ 11~ - ---'-7 a I~,I £NTk I~ N ZS~ -- - ---- I ~ , - -- 9 ` ~ IJ ~ ~ 1 ~ I ' ~ I I ' . ~. I ~I ~ l ` ~, i i'. i l ' _ _ ~ _~.__,I ~~ _ ~ ~ __ - ~ ~--a - I ~ ~ i ~ L5 ~ ~ t 4 ~LiKfSS 1` W ~ ~owea i s ~ PAT~o ~ N I EL,ZE SS / / I ~ ~ ~vG~FSs ~ DN Q6 ~K ~ - ~~- \) i. ~I V~ 1 ~~ ~i~ _J J11C f-Rw (~RRAb~ 1 L x 25 S`~ ~~ SK13 Qk'rH -ry.~ D C.FF 1'Z- (~/tRkoF 19 Y 1 `~ I~ ,. _I - - - I 6NTR`( ,.n ~ 'I wzc MA~rsfi ~ ~~~ '. l4xllO I N W ~ ~ ~ / .3. c~ ._ __ _ _ _ _~. r . _-..-,--- ~~~• .. I~-~'-.- ir ~~ow~~ Q f s I ~ ~ KIT L t:N ~ r o ,•RI~~~ - ~nntJa 1 1..-. y - GL . DN ~P Lr O ~ ~- ~- . - - 6NTR~( A ^ I,.gO~IDRY _. __y __ M / DIN\NLt LIVIN~T ~' I / __._. -__- ~Bi ~~~1, ~' F.P, ! \ i \ J~ .- `~~ 0 `~ ,;~ P h T ~ o Fkno ~ I ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ i ~~ nn ~ I I N ~, ~-- ~ `~ E 1. $ p,S'EM ~ N T 1 ~$ ~~ . ~ ~ ~~ ~ a~,~~q~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ G . ~-~- ~M~ ~k ~- ~~- ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ i y `~~ - cam, ~~ d- ,~ ~~-~- ~~ ~~ - ~- ~2a~ ~- A D~( ~ , / .ill (~(,~ 1:~ ti Cam, -~x`~" - ~ ~~- ~ !~ , ~~. ~y ,- 3~,~~ ~~ 3,5 . ~7 Ii 36,a z- -1~~ ~ ~ ~i D `L T~ S-~.v a , ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~- ~~ ~ ~~ a, l~ ~~"v ~~ ~0•I~ I /~"'~"~v ~ II '~ II "~ `,e' u`-~eJ ~ ~, ~ ~ I~